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] Intersections in protégé

Alba Fuertes alba.fuertes at upc.edu
Fri May 23 06:21:16 PDT 2008


Dear Kaarel,

You are right, the picture is quite vague. Sorry. Here I attached a better version of the picture.

As you can see:

Impact1 appears as the result of the intersection of  (Phase1 with Aspect2)  or  (Phase1 with Aspect3)  or  (Phase2 with Aspect1).

That is the same as: Impact1 takes places a long Phase1 when is only related to Aspect2 and Aspect 3 and, by the same way, Impact 1 takes place along Phase2 when is only related to Aspect1. 

How could this be implemented in Protégé? 

Thank you in advance,

Alba

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alba Fuertes
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - UPC
Departament d'Enginyeria de la Construcció
Grup de Recerca i Innovació en la Construcció - GRIC 
C/Colom 11 - Ed. TR5 - 08222 Terrassa (BCN) - Spain
Telf: +34 93 7398947                 Fax: +34 93 7398670
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kaarel Kaljurand" <kaljurand at gmail.com>
To: "User support for the Protege-OWL editor" <protege-owl at mailman.stanford.edu>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: [protege-owl] Intersections in protégé


Hi,

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Alba Fuertes <alba.fuertes at upc.edu> wrote:
>
> From the idea that an impact is the result of the intersection of an aspect
> and a phase, we pretend to implement with Protégé the relations:
>         An IMPACT takes place along a PHASE
>         An IMPACT is related to an ASPECT
>
> The problem is that an impact can be the result of the different
> intersections (combinations) of phases and aspects (see picture
> attached). How can we introduce these intersections in Protégé? If we
> implement the model showed in the picture, how can protégé indentify
> the correct intersections (not all of them are possible)?

Pictures are vague. It is not clear which relations are mandatory, which
optional, and which illegal.
Does the following text describe what you want?

Every type3-impact takes place along a type1-phase.
Every type3-impact takes place along a type2-phase.
No type3-impact takes place along a type3-phase.
Every type3-impact is related to a type1-aspect.
Every type3-impact is related to a type2-aspect.
Every type3-impact is related to a type3-aspect.

And additionally:

Every type1-impact is an impact.
...
Every type1-phase is a phase.
...
Every type1-aspect is an aspect.
...

And possibly also:

Every impact is a type1-impact or is a type2-impact or is a type-3-impact.
...
No type1-impact is a type2-impact.
...

--
kaarel
_______________________________________________
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/20080523/e0c62f37/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: picture.JPG
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 49795 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20080523/e0c62f37/attachment.JPG>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list