W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > February 2015

Re: Summary of HL7 RDF / W3C COI call: FHIR Ontology Requirements

From: Samson Tu <swt@stanford.edu>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:36:11 -0800
Cc: Samson Tu <swt@stanford.edu>, Lloyd McKenzie <lloyd@lmckenzie.com>, Anthony Mallia <amallia@edmondsci.com>, Sajjad Hussain <hussain@cs.dal.ca>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, w3c semweb HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, "its@lists.hl7.org" <its@lists.hl7.org>
Message-Id: <A205E856-0619-4727-A4E7-2BF7218440F4@stanford.edu>
To: Robert Hausam <rrhausam@gmail.com>

> On Feb 7, 2015, at 9:03 AM, Robert Hausam <rrhausam@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Lloyd, that's certainly correct with the "upper bound", given the conditions that you describe.  If an instance has 5 of "something" when it's declared that it should have 4, then the reasoner can clearly determine that the instance is invalid. 

Not if the reasoner doesn’t know that the 5 “something” are different from each other. In addition to OWA, OWL doesn’t make "unique name assumption" (UNA). When checking cardinality constraints, in addition to OWA, you need to state whether the individuals are distinct.

SAmson
-- 
Samson Tu                                                     email: swt@stanford.edu
Senior Research Scientist                               web: www.stanford.edu/~swt/
Center for Biomedical Informatics Research 	phone: 1-650-725-3391
Stanford University                                          fax: 1-650-725-7944
Received on Tuesday, 10 February 2015 16:36:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 10 February 2015 16:36:45 UTC