Re: Inconsistency is not raised dataAllValuesFrom

I adopted the idea from this link. He and other works consider this case leading to unsatisfiable classes.this is the idea of this anti-pattern:"The ontology developer created a universal restriction to say that C1 instances can only be linked with property R to C2 instances. Next, a new universal restriction is added saying that C1 instances can only be linked with R to C3 instances, with C2 and C3 disjoint. In general, this is because the ontology developer forgot the previous axiom in the same class or in the parent class."
 

     Le Jeudi 25 décembre 2014 17h22, Uli Sattler <Ulrike.Sattler@manchester.ac.uk> a écrit :
   

 ...from what i can see you, you only have 2 "allValuesFrom" restrictions on Person - so it can't possibly be inconsistent (as long as I don't have any hamsters, it is perfectly uncontradictory to state that "all my hamsters are black" and "all my hamsters are not black...this will only cause an inconsistency if I would also say "I have some hamsters", which would then need to be both black and not black).
So, I repeat my earlier suggestion to read up more on owl semantics...

Cheers, Uli
On 25 Dec 2014, at 15:48, "Leila Bayoudhi" <bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr> wrote:


What I model it isn't equivalent to the OWL antipattern OnlinessIsLoneliness(OIL)?

Le Jeudi 25 décembre 2014 16h34, Uli Sattler <Ulrike.Sattler@manchester.ac.uk> a écrit :


Hi Leila
this ontology is consistent - and even the class person is satisfiable: it only becomes unsatisfiable once you request that a person must have an Id....but you don't seem to say that yet, 
Since this mailing list is read by humans, it would be good to post your examples in Manchester syntax - the syntax you use is designed for computers....
Also, I strongly suggest you look more closely into Owl's model based semantics - to get a better understanding of it. All the best!

Cheers, Uli
On 25 Dec 2014, at 11:38, "Leila Bayoudhi" <bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr> wrote:


Hi, I intentionally want to raise inconsistency in my ontology by creating these axioms <owl:Class rdf:about="http://www.semanticweb.org/dell/ontologies/2014/11/untitled-ontology-121#person">        <rdfs:subClassOf>            <owl:Restriction>                <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="http://www.semanticweb.org/dell/ontologies/2014/11/untitled-ontology-121#hasIdentifier"/>                <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="&owl;rational"/>            </owl:Restriction>        </rdfs:subClassOf>        <rdfs:subClassOf>            <owl:Restriction                <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="http://www.semanticweb.org/dell/ontologies/2014/11/untitled-ontology-121#hasIdentifier"/>                <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="&xsd;dateTime"/>            </owl:Restriction>        </rdfs:subClassOf>    </owl:Class> However, Hermit says that all is fine: the ontology is consistent( even the value spaces of the two data ranges are disjoint)Can you tell me please why?