Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Layered Ontologies?
tar at ISI.EDU
Wed Mar 4 14:14:47 PST 2009
On Mar 3, 2009, at 10:37 AM, Johann Petrak wrote:
> Pitonyak, Andrew D wrote:
>> Do you know the term Reification? The typical definition is to
>> create a resource to act as a proxy for an object that you can not
>> As this relates to RDF and OWL, you want to reference a statement
>> (for example, who stated that fact?).
>> _:55445 rdf:type rdf:Statement .
>> _:55445 rdf subject a:productA
>> _:55445 rdf:predicate a:weight
>> _:55445 rdf:object "1.2"
>> _:55445 dc:creator a:Bob
> Yes, I know about reification, but I do not like it ;)
> As has been pointed out in a previous email, any reified
> statement leads a strange "double" life as far as
> e.g. SPARQL Queries are concerned. So one cannot
> just use the reified version of the triple alone and
> as it seems, one has to make sure to always have both
> versions in the store. Also this creates issues when
> maintaining a store that has both the original and
> the reified versions of triples.
Some of this could be solved by using SWRL rules to produce the un-
reified form of the property. Of course, you would need a separate
rule for each property you reified, since SWRL doesn't allow second
order rules to be written.
More information about the protege-owl