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] re asoner doesn't react to intersection

bassiee back_to_basic_69 at hotmail.com
Wed May 7 17:04:48 PDT 2008


Sorry to bother again,
but I have a few similar question:

1/ rule in classA:
((= 1 hasA owl:Thing) ⊓ (= 0 hasB owl:Thing)) ⊔ ((= 1 hasA owl:Thing) ⊓ (= 0
hasB owl:Thing))
(extra information: hasA, hasB are both connect with Domain ClassA and Range
ClassB)

So the rule says that only one of both properties must have one resource.
So in ClassA I make an instance and
the property of 'hasA' doesn't have any resources 
and 'hasB' has for example 5 resources
the reasoner doesn't see this as a problem due the open world assumption,
correct?
Normally the reasoner notices that there can be maximun one resource
connected 
(when you state "≤ 1 hasA owl:Thing") but for the rule above it doesn't...
Still normal?
Should I add the rules?
a/  ≤ 1 hasA owl:Thing
b/  ≤ 1 hasB owl:Thing



2/rule in classA:
(= 1 hasA owl:Thing) ⊔ (= 1 hasB owl:Thing)
(extra information: hasA, hasB are both connect with Domain ClassA and Range
ClassB)

I add 2 resources to the property of 'hasA' and 2 resources to the property
of 'hasB' 
(one of both properties should have only one resource)
The reasoner doesn't react to it. 
Is this normal?

At this moment I'm testing with pellet and racer pro using the dig
interface.
If it is normal that the reasoner doesn't react to it, is there another way
to test sutch rules above with more result?

Thanks in advance, and thanks for all your help so far.
seba


-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/reasoner-doesn%27t-react-to--intersection-tp17083147p17117159.html
Sent from the Protege - OWL mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




More information about the protege-owl mailing list