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] Forcing an error in Protege when minimum data property cardinality is violated

Thomas Russ tar at isi.edu
Fri Nov 5 09:46:21 PDT 2010


On Nov 4, 2010, at 4:41 PM, <rarp at ontoreason.com>  
<rarp at ontoreason.com> wrote:

> Hi:
>
>
> In Protégé, my colleagues and I defined a Class X as follows:   
> “ClassX hasValue exactly 2 integer.”  Then we created a  
> ClassXIndividual in ClassX.  (The example ontology we created is  
> attached to this email.)  We realize that exceeding the maximum  
> cardinality associated with the ClassXIndividual (e.g., asserting 3  
> or more integer values) renders an inconsistency error from the  
> reasoner (Pellet, for example), and we also realize that no  
> inconsistency error occurs below the minimum cardinality (e.g.,  
> asserting 0 or 1 integer values) since the reasoner infers—based on  
> the Open World Assumption—the possible existence of the “missing”  
> asserted values based on the definition of ClassX.  However, we  
> actually want an error to be rendered when 0 or 1 integer values are  
> asserted of ClassXIndividual.  Is there a way to make this happen in  
> Protégé utilizing some reasoner?  Or, maybe writing some special rule?

You would have to implement your own reasoner for doing that, since as  
you note it employs non-standard semantics.

Note that if you do use counting of instances you would also need to  
make sure that they are differentFrom each other in order to properly  
count as separate instances.






More information about the protege-owl mailing list