- From: Abir Qasem <abir.qasem@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 01:02:36 -0400
- To: Wiegand <wiegand@cs.wisc.edu>, <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
define a "likes" property whose domain is people and range is car. then make assertions like likes (man, honda) etc. It will still be verbose in RDF/XML form. Hope this helps. On 5/15/05 4:12 PM, "Wiegand" <wiegand@cs.wisc.edu> wrote: > > In general, I want to formally state in OWL that the subclasses from one > class have a relationship with some of the subclasses of another > class. Suppose men and women are subclasses of people. Also, makes of cars > are subclasses of cars. I want to state that men "like" Hondas and > Mercedes and women "like" Hondas and Fords. (Note, for simplicity, I'm > making this example up!) > > Do I have to model this by including an anonymous subclass in the subclass > definition of men that has onProperty restrictions to Hondas and Mercedes? > And, do I have to make separate relationships (ObjectProperties) to Hondas > and Mercedes? example: > > <owl:Class rdf:ID= "Men"> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource= "#People"/> > <rdfs:subClassOf> {anonymous subclass} > <owl:Restriction> > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="menLikeHondas"/> > <owl:minCardinality rdf:dataType="&xsd:nonNegativeInteger"> > 1 </minCardinality> > </owl:Restriction> > <owl:Restriction> > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="menLikeMercedes"/> > <owl:minCardinality rdf:dataType="&xsd:nonNegativeInteger"> > 1 </minCardinality> > </owl:Restriction> > <rdfs:subClassOf> > </owl:Class> > > Is there another way to express what I want? This seems rather > convoluted. > > Also, if the above is the way to model this, then, I don't > like having to define so many relationships ("menLikeX") but > would rather use a > general relationship, say an inherited general "likes" relationship > between people and cars. Is that possible? > > Thank you, > Nancy Wiegand > >
Received on Monday, 16 May 2005 05:25:42 UTC