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] SWRL Advantages

Thomas Schneider schneidt at cs.man.ac.uk
Mon Jan 18 01:13:30 PST 2010


On 17 Jan 2010, at 23:28, Rodolfo Rieckhof wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> i have another doubt crossing my mind, could this SWRL Rule be  
> expresed in OWL 2 ?
>
> Vehicle(?v) ^ Motor(?m) ^ hasMotor(?v, ?m) -> MotorizedVehicle(?v)
>
> I have tried with: EquivalentClasses(MotorizedVehicle  
> ObjectExactCardinality(1 hasMotor Motor))
> but it does not seem to work. Why is that?

Because this axiom only sais: Motorised vehicles are exactly those  
things that have exactly one motor. But your rule above says:  
Everything that is a *vehicle* and has *some* motor is a motorised  
vehicle (and not necessarily vice versa). So you'd have to say:

     Vehicle and hasMotor some Motor SubClassOf MotorizedVehicle

If you want to *define* MotorizedVehicle, which is stronger than your  
rule, you can say

     EquivalentClasses(MotorizedVehicle, Vehicle and hasMotor some  
Motor)

Cheers

Thomas


>
>
> Thanks in advanced
> Rodolfo
>
>
>
> 2010/1/11 Thomas Russ <tar at isi.edu>
>
> On Jan 11, 2010, at 1:52 PM, Rodolfo Rieckhof wrote:
>
> Hello,
> i am new to OWL, SWRL and would like to know what advantages have  
> SWRL over OWL if any. One more question that i have would be, is  
> there anything that i can only specify in SWRL but not in OWL ? i  
> would appreciate a little example about this one.
>
> SWRL adds additional expressive power.
>
> One example of that is expressing constraints across fillers of two  
> different properties.  For example, "a Person whose boss is his  
> brother" is not something that can be written in OWL, since it is a  
> constraint between fillers of two different properties.  You can,  
> however, express this constraint using SWRL.
>
> Some other examples are constraints that involve numeric bounds on  
> datatype properties in OWL 1.0 (possible in OWL 2.0).  Also, any  
> constraints that involve a computation.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Dr Thomas Schneider                    schneider (at) cs.man.ac.uk  |
|  School of Computer Science       http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~schneidt  |
|  Kilburn Building, Room 2.114                 phone +44 161 2756136  |
|  University of Manchester                                            |
|  Oxford Road                                             _///_       |
|  Manchester M13 9PL                                      (o~o)       |
+-----------------------------------------------------oOOO--(_)--OOOo--+

Nacton (n.)
  The 'n' with which cheap advertising copywriters replace the word  
'and'
  (as in 'fish 'n' chips', 'mix 'n' match', 'assault 'n' battery'), in
  the mistaken belief that it is in some way chummy or endearing.

                   Douglas Adams, John Lloyd: The Deeper Meaning of Liff




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20100118/9475209a/attachment.sig>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list