W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: Using OWL to represent non-state facts

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:58:24 -0400
Message-Id: <40544033-3320-4ED0-875F-C53EABED5887@gmail.com>
Cc: "'C Haley'" <cands589@yahoo.co.uk>, <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
To: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl>

Right, of course there is not reasoning support to, for example,  
check that you are not in two places at the same time. (or the OWL  
equivalent - if you are in place A and place B at the same time then  
A and B are the same place :)

There's a SWBP draft that suggests something along the same lines, btw,
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/Time-Ontology

-Alan

On Sep 16, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Hans Teijgeler wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> We use templates that are in essence N-ary Relations [1]. We define  
> template classes with the applicable property Restrictions, and  
> then instantiate these whenever required.
>
> In your case the template instance for "Peter hosted a meeting in  
> the office yesterday" would look like:
>
>     <Activity rdf:ID="FACT-98232479">
>         <ex:participant rdf:resource="#Peter-20060916"/>
>         <ex:participantType rdf:resource="#host"/>
>         <ex:activity rdf:resource="ACT-32874334"/>
>         <ex:activityType rdf:resource="#meeting"/>
>         <ex:activityLocation rdf:resource="#ourOffice"/>
>     </Activity>
>
> Mind you, this is a rough first cut. We define, separately, a  
> "temporal part" of Peter, that in fact has a beginning and an  
> ending. Aka of 4th dimension as referred to by Henry Story [2].
>
> The meeting is, here, a "temporal whole", because we assume that  
> Peter did host the entire meeting. If he would have hosted only a  
> (temporal) part of the meeting, we would create a temporal part of  
> that meeting for that reason. If he would have hosted only certain  
> parts of the meeting (points on the agenda) we would have created a  
> subactivity for that reason.
>
> More on this you can find on our site [3]
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> PS This is clearly OWL-Full :-)
>
> ____________________
> OntoConsult
> Hans Teijgeler
> ISO 15926 specialist
> Netherlands
> +31-72-509 2005
> www.InfowebML.ws
> hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-swbp-n-aryRelations-20040721/
> [2] http://www.tenthdimension.com/flash2.php
> [3] http://www.infowebml.ws/description/ontology-for-templates/ 
> ontology-for-templates.htm
>
>
> From: C Haley [mailto:cands589@yahoo.co.uk]
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 20:23
> To: public-owl-dev@w3.org
> Subject:
>
> Hi
>
> I’ve been reading through the various OWL documents and from what  
> I’ve seen it appears that OWL is very good at representing state  
> information, either of classes or individuals, but does not seem to  
> allow for representing non-state relationships.
>
> For example I can use OWL to represent the concept ‘man’ as a  
> class, represent Peter as an instance of that class, and I can  
> define a property stateOfHealth, and the concept ill, and create a  
> triple to say stateOfHealth(Peter, ill). This is representing a  
> fact which defines the state of an instance.
>
> But suppose I want to represent the fact that Peter hosted a  
> meeting in the office yesterday.
>
> Even if I created an artificial property ‘toHost’ and a blank node  
> as an instance of the concept ‘meeting’, there is no way to attach  
> the time and location to the property.
>
> Also I would want this property to derive from a URI representing  
> the concept of ‘hosting a meeting’, but the OWL syntax seems to  
> require properties to derive from other properties, not from a  
> generic URI. So clearly this is not the correct way to represent an  
> action.
>
> Can anyone tell me if there are any recommendations or documents  
> describing the preferred solution to this problem? Alternatively is  
> this an area where the existing OWL syntax/vocabulary is likely to  
> be extended - is anyone actively working on this issue at present?  
> Are there any draft recommendations in circulation?
>
> Many thanks for any comments anyone can give.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter now.
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.0.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.3/447 - Release Date: 13- 
> Sep-06
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.0.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.4/449 - Release Date: 15- 
> Sep-06
Received on Monday, 18 September 2006 14:58:44 GMT

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