Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] SWRL Rules / pizza.owl
moodleyp at cs.ukzn.ac.za
Wed Jan 27 01:06:19 PST 2010
I'm fairly new to ontology rules, but I was wondering, *Hot* is a class so
by taking *z* from that class, are you suggesting that you'd like *x* to
have a relationship with every possible *z*?
I don't recall the pizza example that well, but isn't the relationship *
hasSpiciness*, functional? Thus it is not possible for *x* to have a
relationship with every *z* which would, I suspect, make this rule have no
You say that you'd like the Pizza to have a spiciness of *Hot*, but
remember, *Hot* is a class and you can't related an individual to a class
via a property - only via membership. Anyway, like I said, I'm quite new to
this too so I could be mistaken...
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM, David Renoldner <dave.trudes at gmx.net>wrote:
> Hi there,
> i hope this is the right mailing list to ask you something about rules:
> In Protege 4 (Rules-Tab) i want to express that every Pizza which
> hasTopping a SpicyTopping, has a spiciness of Hot:
> Pizza(?x), SpicyTopping(?y), hasTopping(?x, ?y), Hot(?z) ->
> hasSpiciness(?x, ?z).
> If I classify the ontology and query for "all pizzas with spiciness hot", i
> get an empty result.
> But, since hasSpiciness has owl:Thing in its domain this rule should
> Many thanks in advance for your help.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the protege-owl