- From: Yoshio FUKUSHIGE <paatje@cam.hi-ho.ne.jp>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:24:50 +0900
- To: public-owl-dev@w3.org
I'm building an ontology for Audio Visual devices, and wondering how to put "universal" restrictions to members of two classes. (I'm not sure if this wording is appropriate though...) What I want to do is to make every pair of members of two classes to have designated relations. For example, suppose we have my:BDRecorder Class representing all instance of Blu-ray recorders and my:BD-R Class representing all instance of BD-R Discs. Now I want to force force every instance of my:BDRecorder able to record to any instance of my:BD-R. In n3, I think I can write: { ?rec a my:BDRecorder. ?disc a my:BD-R } => { ?rec my:recordableTo ?disc }. but how can I do in OWL 2 (if possible)? If possible, I'd like to do so by stating some "Class level" relation between the two Classes, and make a statement entailing the corresponding "Instance level" relation between the instances of the Classes. I first tried to do so by introducing my:classRecordableToInstanceOf and my:hasInstance (as owl:inverseOf rdf:type) and then stating: my:BDRecorder my:classRecordableToInstanceOf my:BD-R. my:recordableTo owl:propertyChainAxiom ( rdf:type my:classRecordableToInstanceOf my:hasInstance). hoping to entail, if my:MyRecorder a my:BDRecorder and my:MyDisc a my:BD-R, my:MyRecorder my:recordableTo my:MyDisc. but failed. I think the reason was owl:propertyChainAxiom can be used only to list of owl:ObjectProperty's which is not the case with my:classRecordableToInstanceOf nor rdf:type nor my:hasInstance. Could someone help? Thanks in advance, Yoshio Fukushige, Panasonic Corporation.
Received on Tuesday, 31 August 2010 07:38:45 UTC