Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] SWRL negation
martin.oconnor at stanford.edu
Thu Jan 3 16:25:39 PST 2008
Rules 2 and 3 use classical negation semantics; rule 1 is trying to use
negation as failure semantics. I would go to Wikipedia for a fairly good
discussion of both types of negation.
Thusitha Mabotuwana wrote:
>I'm trying to understand the differences between the 3 different negation types
>mentioned in the wiki :
>Person(?p) ^ ¬ hasCar(?p, ?c) -> CarlessPerson(?p) (9LB)
>Person(?p) ^ (hasCar = 0)(?p) -> CarlessPerson(?p) (9U1)
>(not Person)(?x) -> NonHuman(?x) (9TM)
>Why is it allowed to have the last 2 types while the 1st case is not supported?
>With regard to the 1st rule, the Wiki says "it is easy to see that the addition
>of a car to the ontology could invalidate this rule's conclusion", but isn't it
>the same even for the 2nd rule?
>Although the 2nd rule is there in the Wiki (9U1), the swrl tab doesn't seem to
>support this and turns red when you try to enter something like "(hasCar =
>0)(?p)". Is this the expected behavior?
>protege-owl mailing list
>protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
>Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
More information about the protege-owl