Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-owl] the counterpart of primary key in relational db for owl?

shangrun du adu2008 at googlemail.com
Thu Jan 31 14:00:12 PST 2008


Hi all,

It was really very nice of you to give me so much helpful advice, thanks
again for the kindly help :-)
If I have correctly understood the answer, it means we could name our
product individuals in our knowledge base by using their serial number value
as part of  the uris, however I think the uris could still semantically
represent the same individual because of the none UNA although they have now
different syntax form and even if they identify different products, the
products could still have the same serial number value. Is it possible to
restrict this aspect without making the ontology OWL Full?

Best Regards,
Jun

2008/1/30, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg at gmail.com>:
>
>  Yes, this is the approach we took. Works fine.-Alan
>
> On Jan 30, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Thomas Russ wrote:
>
> As for the serial number case, you can't express that in OWL because
>
> you can't put restrictions on datatype values, since they are not OWL
>
> objects.  The closest you could come would be to use the serial number
>
> in the URI naming the OWL object.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing:
> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20080131/aeac4159/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list