W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: relate subclasses to other subclasses

From: Abir Qasem <abir.qasem@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 01:02:36 -0400
To: Wiegand <wiegand@cs.wisc.edu>, <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BEADA1AC.A4D2%abir.qasem@gmail.com>

define a "likes" property whose domain is people and range is car. then make
assertions like

likes (man, honda) etc. It will still be verbose in RDF/XML form.

Hope this helps. 


On 5/15/05 4:12 PM, "Wiegand" <wiegand@cs.wisc.edu> wrote:

> 
> In general, I want to formally state in OWL that the subclasses from one
> class have a relationship with some of the subclasses of another
> class. Suppose men and women are subclasses of people. Also, makes of cars
> are subclasses of cars. I want to state that men "like" Hondas and
> Mercedes and women "like" Hondas and Fords. (Note, for simplicity, I'm
> making this example up!)
> 
> Do I have to model this by including an anonymous subclass in the subclass
> definition of men that has onProperty restrictions to Hondas and Mercedes?
> And, do I have to make separate relationships (ObjectProperties) to Hondas
> and Mercedes? example:
> 
> <owl:Class rdf:ID= "Men">
>  <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource= "#People"/>
>  <rdfs:subClassOf>                                  {anonymous subclass}
>      <owl:Restriction>
>          <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="menLikeHondas"/>
>          <owl:minCardinality rdf:dataType="&xsd:nonNegativeInteger">
>               1 </minCardinality>
>      </owl:Restriction>
>      <owl:Restriction>
>          <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="menLikeMercedes"/>
>          <owl:minCardinality rdf:dataType="&xsd:nonNegativeInteger">
>               1 </minCardinality>
>      </owl:Restriction>
>  <rdfs:subClassOf>
> </owl:Class>
> 
> Is there another way to express what I want? This seems rather
> convoluted.
> 
> Also, if the above is the way to model this, then, I don't
> like having to define so many relationships ("menLikeX") but
> would rather use a
> general relationship, say an inherited general "likes" relationship
> between people and cars. Is that possible?
> 
> Thank you,
> Nancy Wiegand
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 16 May 2005 05:25:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:53 GMT