- From: Gocev, Pavel <pavel.gocev@ipk.fraunhofer.de>
- Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 11:25:37 +0200
- To: "Ibach, Brandon L" <brandon.l.ibach@lmco.com>
- Cc: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <9C2EB248A853724FBA9B4EA03AB977FD02766F91@monster.ipk-w2k3.ipk.fhg.de>
Hi Brandon, The purpose of ontology and inference is to model the manufacturing domain and to reuse the modelled experience knowledge in the processes like product design, factory planning and simulation. The result should be a simulation of the production in an early phase of product/process/factory design, when not enough data and information for the simulation-team are available. These missing data/information is usually experience of the engineers from different departments (product design, production, technology, planning and scheduling, etc.) that usually is elicitated during the design/planning projects in various project-meetings and discussions. Moreover, the continuous update of data and information and running of inferences can discover some "hidden" actions (e.G. late delivery of a resource, can influence Production-Plan_A but not Production-Plan_B). This was a very conscious description, I don't know if it is a part of your domain of interest. Pavel ________________________________ Von: Ibach, Brandon L [mailto:brandon.l.ibach@lmco.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 31. August 2007 14:44 An: Gocev, Pavel; public-owl-dev@w3.org Cc: matthew.pocock@ncl.ac.uk Betreff: RE: Bill-Of-Material in OWL Pavel, Thanks for the details. Your use case is much clearer, now. I'd say the way you've modeled this just fine. As far as inferencing goes, I'd need to know more about what you hope to have the reasoner do for you. Can you give an example of what sort of conclusions you'd like the reasoner to make, or what sort of queries you'd like to run (and the results you hope to get)? -Brandon :) ________________________________ From: Gocev, Pavel [mailto:pavel.gocev@ipk.fraunhofer.de] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 7:25 AM To: public-owl-dev@w3.org Cc: Ibach, Brandon L; matthew.pocock@ncl.ac.uk Subject: Re: Bill-Of-Material in OWL I think I need to explain more details of my example: To build the Product_A (e.G. a Table_X), 4 same pieces of Component_C1 (e.G. 4 Legs) and 2 same pieces of Component_C2 (e.G. 2 wooden Boards) are needed. To build the Product_B (e.G. a Table_Y), 3 same pieces of Component_C1 (e.G. 3 Legs) and 3 same pieces of Component_C2 (e.G. 3 wooden Boards) are needed. Brandon, Matthew, thank you very much for he examples, but Product_A, Product_B, Component_C1 and Component_C2 are to be instances. I am using TopBraidComposer whereby I would like to infere on the base of Jena or SWRL Rules. What I have done is introducing the class "Child" with instances (PA_Child1, PA_Child2, PB_Child1 and PB_Child2) and suitable properties defining: Product_A Product_A --> hasChild --> PA_Child1 Product_A --> hasChild --> PA_Child2. PA_Child1 --> isMaterial --> Component_C1 PA_Child1 --> hasQuantity --> 4 PA_Child2 --> isMaterial --> Component_C2 PA_Child2 --> hasQuantity --> 2 Product_B Product_B --> hasChild --> PB_Child1 Product_B --> hasChild --> PB_Child2. PB_Child1 --> isMaterial --> Component_C1 PB_Child1 --> hasQuantity --> 3 PB_Child2 --> isMaterial --> Component_C2 PB_Child2 --> hasQuantity --> 3 I hope I can run inference on this after the change of my rules accordingly. Pavel
Received on Monday, 3 September 2007 09:26:05 UTC