Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Different results when running SQWRL-query in protege and in own programm using protege jars
milo at informatik.uni-kiel.de
Fri Aug 6 01:59:48 PDT 2010
Yes. I'll try to trim & merge my ontologies and send it to you as a
Am 05.08.2010 18:50, schrieb Martin O'Connor:
> The same API are used by both approaches. Can you send me a small,
> standalone ontology that demonstrates this problem.
> Michael Lodemann wrote:
>> Hello Protégé team,
>> as the title says I'm a bit confused about different query results
>> within protege 3.4.4 and a java program using the the same jars from
>> protege 3.4.4.
>> Of course I'm using the same ontology in both cases.
>> In the program the queries ae executed using
>> and the results are obtained using
>> SQWRLResult result = queryEngine.getSQWRLResult(rule);
>> Is this the same way protege does the query processing?
>> Has anyone got a clue how this different behaviour happens and how to
>> avoid it?
>> protege-owl mailing list
>> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
>> Instructions for unsubscribing:
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> Instructions for unsubscribing:
M.Sc. Michael Lodemann Dept. for Computer Science, CAU of Kiel
Room 1106 Communication Systems Research Group
Christian-Albrechts-Platz 4 Fax: +49-(0)431-880-7615
24098 Kiel - Germany milo at informatik.uni-kiel.de
More information about the protege-owl