- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 21:21:46 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: bdn_01@hotmail.com, semantic-web@w3.org
On 3/16/06, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> > How to express that a child has a preference for dogs rather than cats as a
> > pet?
> > - A given child is an individual with property "hasPetPreference".
> > - A dog or a cat is a class (we should allow for identifying an actual beast
> > as an individual having class dog or cat).
> All that said, there is an effort to extend OWL in a way that gives you a
> light-weight way to at least state a relationship between an individual and a
> class. In this extension, OWL 1.1, class names can be also used as names of
> individuals,
Correct me if I'm wrong Peter, but isn't that already possible in OWL
Full? (Ok, I assume the way it's done in OWL 1.1 is more tractable,
but the question was only how to express the information).
There are other possibilities for modelling the scenario, a quick crack -
:Cat a owl:Class .
:Dog a owl:Class .
:CatPreferrer :prefers :Cat .
:DogPreferrer :prefers :Dog .
:CatPreferrer a owl:Class .
:DogPreferrer a owl:Class .
_:susan a :Child .
_:susan a :DogPreferer .
does that work? ok, how about asking what animal a child likes (not
sure of the collection capability/syntax in SPARQL) -
SELECT ?child, ?animal WHERE
{
?child a ?preferrer .
?preferrer owl:unionOf (:CatPreferrer :DogPreferrer);
:prefers ?animal .
}
hmm, maybe...
Cheers,
Danny.
--
http://dannyayers.com
Received on Thursday, 16 March 2006 20:21:52 UTC