Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] A question on Aggregation characteristics of SWRL
tar at ISI.EDU
Thu Oct 30 12:22:55 PDT 2008
On Oct 30, 2008, at 9:15 AM, Matsokis Aristeidis wrote:
> Dear all,
> I have the SWRL rule:
> Corrective_Maintenance(?x) ^hasValue(?x, ?v) -> sqwrl:sum(?v)
> On the SWRL Tab the result is shown.
> However, it seems like there is no way I can transfer this
> information in an OWL instance directly, meaning that I cannot do
> something like this:
> ^Results(Results_Corrective_Maintenance) ^hasValue(?x, ?v) ->
> sqwrl:sum(?v) ^ hasSum (Results_Corrective_Maintenance, sqwrl:sum(?v))
That is correct. You cannot do this.
> Have I missed something here?
> Is there any alternative way (other than manually or through csv-
> >excel-> DataMaster) I could transfer this information to an OWL
> instance (Results_Corrective_Maintenance)?
You would have to do it manually or through program code.
That because the aggregation operators make an implicit closed-world
assumption and thus cannot be used for OWL inferences, since the OWL
semantic model specifies open-world semantics. Allowing such closure
would violate the semantic model, and it is therefore not supported by
inference tools such as SWRL, which want to preserve the OWL semantics.
> If none of the above is valid, is there a plan to implement such
> Thank you very much in advance for your time once more.
More information about the protege-owl