W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > March 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-265 (TLebo): RL, why? [Ontology]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:28:44 -0500
Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <A93E4EC7-0179-4143-82AA-45D8BE61F492@rpi.edu>
To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Stian,

I'm up and running with your checker.

I've started listing the kinds of naughty restrictions.

In particular, not being able to state the following hurts

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#Breaks_RL:_one_startedAt

-Tim


On Mar 5, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote:

> Thanks, Stain. I look forward to trying this out.
> 
> I added your notes at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#RL_compliance so that we can develop them further.
> 
> Regards,
> Tim
> 
> On Mar 5, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> 
>> Right, I've now added my little JAR, which you can invoke just calling
>> 'make' in the ontology/ folder:
>> 
>> : stain@ralph ~/src/provenance-wg/prov/ontology; make
>> java -jar bin/profilechecker.jar ProvenanceOntology.owl OWL2RLProfile
>> 
>> 
>> If everything is fine, there is no further output.
>> 
>> However, if I add that Element is a subclass of (Activity or Entity) I get:
>> 
>> : stain@ralph ~/src/provenance-wg/prov/ontology; make
>> java -jar bin/profilechecker.jar ProvenanceOntology.owl OWL2RLProfile
>> Use of non-superclass expression in position that requires a
>> superclass expression:
>> ObjectUnionOf(<http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Activity>
>> <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Entity>)
>> [SubClassOf(<http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Element>
>> ObjectUnionOf(<http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Activity>
>> <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Entity>)) in
>> <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/>]
>> make: *** [test] Error 1
>> 
>> 
>> See https://github.com/stain/profilechecker for source code of the JAR
>> - it is based on OWL API 3.2.4, and can also check against other (or
>> all) profiles.
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 13:56, Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 18:40, Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu> wrote:
>>>> None of these require OWL-Full, and are well within DL. I haven't had
>>>> trouble reasoning over these sorts of restrictions with data in place.
>>> 
>>> Well, we can keep it in DL if that still does the job, I just meant
>>> that there would be no OWL profile restrictions on forming those
>>> rules, and that it should be possible to 'retrofit' them like that.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
>>> School of Computer Science
>>> The University of Manchester
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
>> School of Computer Science
>> The University of Manchester
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 20:29:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:06:58 GMT