Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] basic doubt
james at howison.name
Thu Oct 23 10:40:12 PDT 2008
On 23 Oct 2008, at 12:40 PM, Thomas Russ wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2008, at 9:20 AM, heloise at inf.ufsc.br wrote:
>> I have a basic doubt...
>> Supose that a Class A has the datatype property “has_name”
>> If I have a class B (disjoint with A), and the class B also has a
>> Should I create a new property for class B (for ex. has_B_name) ? or
>> I can use
>> the same property “has_name” used in class A?
> You can use the same property.
> In fact, if you intend that the properties have the same meaning, you
> should use the same name.
> Having the classes be disjoint just says that they can't have any
> individuals in common. But they can still have all of the same
> properties available. You only have to make sure you don't restrict
> the domain of "has_name" to be class A only. It is fine to have it be
> Class A or (union) Class B, which is what you get by adding multiple
> domains to a property in the Protege editor.
Of course there's no need to place any domain on the "has_name"
property, or just the most general classes (like rdf:Resource). This
is why the Protege Pizza tutorial recommends avoiding rdfs:domain and
rdfs:range until one has a good understanding of their implications
Take the example of rdfs:label:
rdf:type rdf:Property ;
rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> ;
rdfs:domain rdfs:Resource ;
rdfs:range rdfs:Literal ;
rdfs:label "label" ;
rdfs:comment "A human-readable name for the subject." .
Thus rdfs:label has a domain and range, but essentially it won't have
any inference meaning, since all one learns is that something that has
a rdfs:label property is a rdfs:Resource, which one probably knew
I guess in a perfect model rdfs:domain and rdfs:range would be either
the closest shared ancestor, or as Thomas points out a Union of all
the Classes which can legitimately use the property. The inference
implications of a Union class can be a bit tricky to think through,
though; as I understand it they'll only come into play in combination
with other statements.
More information about the protege-owl