W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > November 2003

Re: OWL Rule language

From: Monika Solanki <monika@dmu.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 08:52:56 +0000
Message-ID: <3FAF51E8.7010903@dmu.ac.uk>
To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
   Ian Horrocks wrote:

>On November 7, Monika Solanki writes:
>  
>
>>Hi Ian,
>>
>>Thanks for the reply!!!!
>>
>>I have a confusion regarding "sameIndividualAtom". Although I have dome 
>>some kind of refinement over my earlier version, that did not use 
>>"sameIndividualAtom", but somehow I still feel that "sameIndividualAtom" 
>>is the way to go.
>>
>>I want to restate the problem.
>>
>>I define a variable
>>
>><owl:Variable rdf:ID="acctID"/>
>>
>>and I have an individual of class Input defined as
>>
>><process:Input rdf:ID="AccID">
>>....
>>....
>></process:Input>
>>
>>Now, what I want to say is that the variable is actually an individual 
>>and is the same as the individual, AcctID, and this is the one which 
>>should be used for defining further property predicates.
>>
>>I feel, I can use "sameIndividualAtom"  to express this and the 
>>semantics would not be affected, so will this be valid?
>>
>><owl: sameIndividualAtom >
>>    <owl:Variable rdf:about ="#acctID"/>
>>    <owl::Individual rdf:about="AcctID"/>
>></owl:sameIndividualAtom>
>>
>>I have changed owl:name to rdf:about
>>    
>>
>
>This is a legal atom. It is satisfied by a binding just in case the
>variable and the individual are interpreted as the same object. I'm
>not quite sure, though, why you would want to do this rather than just
>using the individual itself for defining further property predicates.
>  
>
Oh, I thought that was not allowed. I was under the impression that only 
elements defined as variables can be used within property predicates, or 
does it mean that I can declare variabls. to be an individual e.g

<process:Input rdf:ID="AccID">
....
....
</process:Input>

<owl:Variable rdf:about="#AcctID"/>

Will this be correct?, if so, it will be very convenient to use.

>Ian
>
>
>  
>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Monika
>>
>>Ian Horrocks wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>On November 1, Monika Solanki writes:
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hello Ian and Peter,
>>>>
>>>>I have been studying the OWL Rule language. I am a bit confused  over 
>>>>the interpretation atoms in general and Class atom in particular.
>>>>
>>>>As mentioned in the doc,
>>>>Informally, an atom C(x) holds if x is an instance of the class 
>>>>description C
>>>>
>>>>So, what is the interpretation of this:
>>>>
>>>><owlx:classAtom> 
>>>> <owlx:Class owlx:name="Person" />
>>>> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" />
>>>></owlx:classAtom> 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Does it mean that x1 is an instance of Class C ?
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Informally, if it is in an antecedent then it is a condition that is
>>>satisfied whenever x1 binds to an object that is an instance of C; if
>>>it is in a consequent, then it is an assertion that the object x1 is
>>>bound to is an instance of C.
>>>
>>>Ian
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>Monika
>>>>
>>>>-- 
>>>>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
>>>>Monika Solanki
>>>>Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)
>>>>De Montfort University
>>>>Hawthorn building, H00.18
>>>>The Gateway
>>>>Leicester LE1 9BH, UK
>>>>
>>>>phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170
>>>>email: monika@dmu.ac.uk
>>>>web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika
>>>>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>-- 
>>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
>>Monika Solanki
>>Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)
>>De Montfort University
>>Hawthorn building, H00.18
>>The Gateway
>>Leicester LE1 9BH, UK
>>
>>phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170
>>email: monika@dmu.ac.uk
>>web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika
>>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
>>
>><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
>><html>
>><head>
>>  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
>>  <title></title>
>></head>
>><body>
>>Hi Ian,<br>
>><br>
>>Thanks for the reply!!!!<br>
>><br>
>>I have a confusion regarding "sameIndividualAtom". Although I have dome some
>>kind of refinement over my earlier version, that did not use "sameIndividualAtom",
>>but somehow I still feel that "sameIndividualAtom" is the way to go.<br>
>><br>
>>I want to restate the problem.<br>
>><br>
>>I define a variable <br>
>><br>
>>&lt;owl:Variable rdf:ID="acctID"/&gt;<br>
>><br>
>>and I have an individual of class Input defined as <br>
>><br>
>>&lt;process:Input rdf:ID="AccID"&gt;<br>
>>....<br>
>>....<br>
>>&lt;/process:Input&gt;<br>
>><br>
>>Now, what I want to say is that the variable is actually an individual and
>>is the same as the individual, AcctID, and this is the one which should be
>>used for defining further property predicates. <br>
>><br>
>>I feel, I can use "sameIndividualAtom" &nbsp;to express this and the semantics
>>would not be affected, so will this be valid?<br>
>><br>
>>&lt;owl: sameIndividualAtom &gt;<br>
>>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;owl:Variable rdf:about ="#acctID"/&gt;<br>
>>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;owl::Individual rdf:about="AcctID"/&gt;<br>
>>&lt;/owl:sameIndividualAtom&gt;<br>
>><br>
>>I have changed owl:name to rdf:about <br>
>><br>
>>Thanks,<br>
>><br>
>>Monika<br>
>><br>
>>Ian Horrocks wrote:<br>
>><blockquote type="cite"
>> cite="mid16298.45218.115266.619802@merlin.horrocks.net">
>>  <pre wrap="">On November 1, Monika Solanki writes:
>>  </pre>
>>  <blockquote type="cite">
>>    <pre wrap="">Hello Ian and Peter,
>>
>>I have been studying the OWL Rule language. I am a bit confused  over 
>>the interpretation atoms in general and Class atom in particular.
>>
>>As mentioned in the doc,
>>Informally, an atom C(x) holds if x is an instance of the class 
>>description C
>>
>>So, what is the interpretation of this:
>>
>>&lt;owlx:classAtom&gt; 
>>  &lt;owlx:Class owlx:name="Person" /&gt;
>>  &lt;owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" /&gt;
>>&lt;/owlx:classAtom&gt; 
>>
>>
>>Does it mean that x1 is an instance of Class C ?
>>    </pre>
>>  </blockquote>
>>  <pre wrap=""><!---->
>>Informally, if it is in an antecedent then it is a condition that is
>>satisfied whenever x1 binds to an object that is an instance of C; if
>>it is in a consequent, then it is an assertion that the object x1 is
>>bound to is an instance of C.
>>
>>Ian
>>
>>  </pre>
>>  <blockquote type="cite">
>>    <pre wrap="">Thanks,
>>
>>Monika
>>
>>-- 
>>**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**
>>Monika Solanki
>>Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)
>>De Montfort University
>>Hawthorn building, H00.18
>>The Gateway
>>Leicester LE1 9BH, UK
>>
>>phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170
>>email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a>
>>web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a>
>>**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**
>>    </pre>
>>  </blockquote>
>>  <pre wrap=""><!---->
>>  </pre>
>></blockquote>
>><br>
>><div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
>>**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**
>><br>
>> Monika Solanki<br>
>> Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)<br>
>> De Montfort University<br>
>> Hawthorn building, H00.18 <br>
>>  The Gateway <br>
>> Leicester LE1 9BH, UK  <br>
>><br>
>>    phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170  intern: 6170  <br>
>> email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a> <br>
>> web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a><br>
>> **&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**</div>
>><br>
>></body>
>></html>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

-- 
**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
Monika Solanki
Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)
De Montfort University
Hawthorn building, H00.18
The Gateway
Leicester LE1 9BH, UK

phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170
email: monika@dmu.ac.uk
web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika
**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**


-- 
**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
Monika Solanki
Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)
De Montfort University
Hawthorn building, H00.18
The Gateway
Leicester LE1 9BH, UK

phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170
email: monika@dmu.ac.uk
web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika
**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
Received on Monday, 10 November 2003 03:46:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 16 March 2008 00:10:53 GMT