W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > January to March 2011

Querying for individuals

From: Cristian Cocos <cristico@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:07:24 -0400
Message-ID: <4D6D43EC.5000001@gmail.com>
To: pellet-users@lists.owldl.com, public-owl-dev@w3.org
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Pellet-users] Querying for individuals
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:56:35 -0500
From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
To: cristi@ieee.org <cristi@ieee.org>
CC: Brandon Ibach <brandon@clarkparsia.com>,        Uli Sattler 
<sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>

Are all the individuals asserted or inferred to be different from each 
other.  (exercise: what if they are not)

-Alan

On Feb 28, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Cristian Cocos <cristico@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/22/2011 0:55, Brandon Ibach wrote:
>> Not necessarily.  Given OWL's open world assumption, just because an
>> individual isn't asserted to be a member of B doesn't mean it isn't.
>> In other words, in order for Pellet to return an individual for the
>> "not B" query, it has to be able to prove that the individual is not a
>> member of B.
>
> Thanks for all the answers. I made the following experiment: I *defined* the class B as being (equivalent to) owl:oneOf(list of all individuals in B), yet querying with "not B" still doesn't give me what I want. Isn't *that* supposed to give me the complementary of B?
>
> Cheers,
>
> C
>
> --
> Cristian Cocos
> Post Doctoral Fellow
> Centre for Logic and Information, StFX University 54B St. Mary's Street,
> Antigonish NS, Canada B2G 2W5
> Tel: + 1 (902) 867-4931, Fax: +1 (902) 867-1397
>
> Current research: "Building Decision-Support Through Dynamic Workflow
> Systems for Health Care"
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 19:08:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:58 GMT