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] properties on classes?

Anthony McCallum mccallum.anthony at gmail.com
Thu Jan 21 16:08:43 PST 2010


Does Protege 4.0 support OWL-Full?  If not using OWL-Full, then the  
only way to give classes data properties is using punning, correct?   
Based on your explanation, annotation properties are not one really  
what I'm looking for.

Thanks again,
Anthony

On 20-Jan-10, at 2:03 AM, protege-owl-request at lists.stanford.edu wrote:

> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:27:36 -0800
> From: Thomas Russ <tar at ISI.EDU>
> To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor
> 	<protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: Re: [protege-owl] properties on classes?
> Message-ID: <09EC2187-4600-4951-B2E7-8A42337B79CD at isi.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
>
> On Jan 19, 2010, at 5:07 PM, Anthony McCallum wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your response.  As of now I am still working on a simple
>> classification which will not rely on reasoning.  However, I would
>> like to ensure that this structure will allow for certain
>> characteristics to be attached to some of the classes that I have
>> defined.  So perhaps in the future, we would like to be able to
>> reason and automatically classify individuals based on these
>> properties.  Based on your answer, I understand that this could
>> potentially be possible if I use OWL-Full.  This automatic
>> classification will not be attempted for quite some time (if ever)
>> so I believe that OWL-Full should be appropriate (assuming that new
>> reasoners, etc. will now be using OWL-Full).  Please let me know if
>> I am completely wrong on this.
>
> There is some work on OWL-Full reasoners, but I'm not current with
> what is being done.  In general, they are not as widespread because
> you run into computational issues with OWL-Full.  That is why OWL-DL
> has the restrictions it has -- to make tractable, sound and complete
> reasoners possible.
>
>>
>> On another note, is there any way to reason using annotation
>> properties, or do these have no logical significance?
>
> The classifiers won't do any reasoning with annotation properties,
> because they do not affect the structural definition of classes.
> Really only the property restrictions do that, so that is what is
> considered when performing classification (as well as asserted
> subClassOf).
>
> What sort of reasoning would you want to do with the annotation
> properties?  And what sort of annotations do you wish to use?  A bit
> of an example often makes it easier to come up with modeling
> recommendations.
>
> Some common examples of annotations would be things like a
> lastChangedDate, author, etc. which you would want to attach to a
> particular class.  The standard rdfs:comment is also like an  
> annotation.
>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Anthony
>>
>> On 13-Jan-10, at 12:08 PM, protege-owl-request at lists.stanford.edu
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Message: 5
>>> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:14:04 -0800
>>> From: Thomas Russ <tar at ISI.EDU>
>>> To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor
>>> 	<protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu>
>>> Subject: Re: [protege-owl] properties on classes?
>>> Message-ID: <B0435737-DC73-4A31-BC52-34C201E8538E at isi.edu>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 12, 2010, at 8:49 PM, Anthony McCallum wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Is there any practical way to attach properties to classes?  Or can
>>>> properties only be used in the context of individuals?
>>>
>>> Short Answer:  Use an AnnotationProperty.
>>>
>>>
>>> Long Answer:  It depends.
>>>
>>> If you want to stay within the OWL-DL level of expressivity, then  
>>> you
>>> are limited to using Annotation properties for attaching information
>>> to classes themselves.  In OWL-DL, ObjectProperty, DatatypeProperty
>>> and AnnotationProperty are disjoint.  And you can't attach Object or
>>> Datatype properties to classes or properties.  You also cannot have
>>> classes or properties be property values, except for certain built- 
>>> in
>>> properties like equvialentClass, subClassOf, etc.
>>>
>>> If you are willing to use OWL-Full, then AnnotationProperty is not
>>> disjoint from ObjectProperty or DatatypeProperty.  You can attach  
>>> any
>>> properties to classes and you can also uses classes as property
>>> values.  Reasoners are not guaranteed to work on OWL-Full  
>>> ontologies,
>>> although in practice the reasoners will generally function while
>>> ignoring the OWL-Full constructs.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20100121/97905e66/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list