- 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