Re: Deduced property

Hopefully I have better mutex-foo this time. :)

On 29/01/2014 13:30, Jean-Claude Moissinac wrote:
> No, it's not the answer because hasAncestor is transitive and hasParent
> isn't...
> (I've a lot of similar situations)

Saying

 :hasParent rdfs:subPropertyOf :hasAncestor .
 :hasAncestor a owl:TransitiveProperty .

does not make :hasParent transitive.

Also take the data:

 :a :hasParent :b .
 :b :hasParent :c .

Now we have as entailments:

 :a :hasAncestor :b . #sp
 :b :hasAncestor :c . #sp
 :a :hasAncestor :c . #trans

We *don't* have:

 :a :hasParent :c . #not entailed

... :hasParent is implied to be transitive.

Best,
Aidan

> --
> Jean-Claude Moissinac
>
>
>
> 2014-01-29 Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de
> <mailto:richard@cyganiak.de>>
>
>     Jean-Claude,
>
>     You’re looking for this (in Turtle syntax):
>
>        :hasParent rdfs:subClassOf :hasAncestor.
>
>     (Don’t try to read or write RDF/XML directly. You’ll go mad. Use the
>     friendly syntaxes such as Turtle, or graphical tools.)
>
>     Best,
>     Richard
>
>
>     On 29 Jan 2014, at 16:18, Jean-Claude Moissinac
>     <jean-claude.moissinac@telecom-paristech.fr
>     <mailto:jean-claude.moissinac@telecom-paristech.fr>> wrote:
>
>      > Sorry if my question is very naive, but I'm stuck on this for a while
>      > if I go to examples in the document
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-owl2-primer-20090421/
>      > I just want to add the following axiom (expressed here in my syntax)
>      > if
>      > ?s :hasParent  ?f
>      > Then
>      > ?s :hasAncestor ?f
>      >
>      > I've checked a lot of documents and I don't figure how to do it
>     (directly in XML/RDF or interactively with Protégé)
>      >
>      > Thank you in adavnace for your help
>      >
>      > --
>      > Jean-Claude
>      >
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 16:45:26 UTC