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

RE: beginer question about inferencing

From: Yoandy Rodriguez <yrodriguezma@uci.cu>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 14:44:32 -0500
To: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Cc: "public-owl-dev@w3.org" <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1299267872.2890.321.camel@ant-colony>
El vie, 04-03-2011 a las 12:17 +0000, Michael Schneider escribió:
> Hi Yoandy!
> Not an answer, but I need to ask for clarification. See below:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: public-owl-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-dev-
> >request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Yoandy Rodriguez
> >Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 5:11 PM
> >To: public-owl-dev@w3.org
> >Subject: beginer question about inferencing
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> >Currently I'm trying to build a model that allows me to make the
> >following inferences.
> >"if someone is friend of two people who hates themselves then he is a
> >neutral person"
> Do you mean that each friend hates himself reflexively ("hates(?friend,?friend)"),
> or rather that the two friends hate each other ("hates(?f1,?f2) and hates(?f2,?f1)").
> I guess, it's the second option, since it then makes more sense to stay neutral? :-)
> >also
> >"if user have read access to a file then reading the file is allowed
> >else it is forbidden"
> Do you mean:
> [1] "if there /exists/ at least one user ?u 
>     who has read access to the specific file ?f, 
>     then ?f is generally readable ("readable(?f)")"
> ? Or do you mean:
> [2] "if the /specific/ user ?u has read access
>     to the specific file ?f, then ?u is allowed
>     to read ?f ("allowedToRead(?u,?f)")
> ? In the case of [1], reading file ?f would then be forbidden ("forbidden(?f)"), if there is no such user having read access to it. In case [2], if the /negation/ of the assertion "hasReadAccess(?u,?f)" holds, then the assertion "forbidden(?u,?f)" is entailed. Which one do you want to express (or maybe a third scenario)?
> >Can someone point to towards and example of how to express this kind of
> >relations?
> >PD.
> >Thanks in advance and please excuse any typo.
> Cheers,
> Michael
> --
> Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
> Research Scientist, Information Process Engineering (IPE)
> Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
> Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
> Email: michael.schneider@fzi.de
> WWW  : http://www.fzi.de/michael.schneider
> ==============================================================================
> FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
> Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
> Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
> Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
> Stiftung Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
> Vorstand: Dipl. Wi.-Ing. Michael Flor, Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Ralf Reussner,
> Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Dr. h.c. Wolffried Stucky, Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Rudi Studer
> Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
> ==============================================================================
Hello Michael,

What I want to express is something like this:
but without using SWRL or another rule languaje, I figure there must be
a way of doing it using only OWL (but again, I'm still reading my first 
semantic web book so there's a 99% chance that I'm wrong).
In the second expression I want to, if a given user ?user has a
permission ?perm who matches any of ?file permissions, then state that
the ?user can access the ?file, else state that he can't.

Received on Friday, 4 March 2011 19:45:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:20 UTC