- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 09:58:12 +0000
- To: Loris Bozzato <loris.bozzato@uninsubria.it>
- Cc: public-owl-dev@w3.org
Hello, On 31 Jan 2009, at 03:22, Loris Bozzato wrote: [snip] > I'd like to model the fact that every instance of a class C has as > value of the property P every instance of a class D. Really? Where D is unconstrained (i.e., may have arbitrary members)? I've having trouble understanding why one would want this to the point of having trouble thinking of solutions! Could you describe your representational problem? > In other words, I'm looking for something analogous to the hasValue > restriction, in which, in place of declaring the relation to a > single individual, I could declare the relation to every individual > belonging to a certain class. You mean, something like, D = oneOf (:x, :y, ;z). x != y != z. C = P min 3 D. (So, every C has to have a P relation to x, y, and z.) But where you don't want to put in a set of values for D and don't want to have to know its cardinality in advance? [snip] > for example, how can I express that a specific class of diseases > can affect any (kind of) tooth? Oh, this seems different. This seems to be the "may" problem. See: http://www.webont.org/owled/2008/papers/owled2008eu_submission_14.pdf My student, Pavel, and I are working on some probability based approaches to coping with the semantics Alan wants. I guess the first question is...are these the semantics *you* want? Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2009 09:58:45 UTC