Re: Representation of Negative Assertions in OWL 1.0

On Jun 8, 2008, at 7:14 AM, Kashyap, Vipul wrote:

>> Individual(Sarkozy type(Restriction(isPresidentOf allValuesFrom
>> (complementOf(oneOf(USA))))))
> The above statement says:
> "If Sarkozy is the president of a country than that country is a  
> country other
> than the USA".
> This to me appears different from "Sarkozy is not the president of  
> USA".
> How about the following formulation (Please excuse incorrect syntax):
> Individual(Sarkoy type(Restriction(= 0 isPresidentOf oneOf{USA)}))

isPresidentOf only (not {USA})
isPresidentOf exactly 0 {USA}

are equivalent classes. Try it in protege 4.

> I would assume that the above two formulations are logically  
> equivalent but the
> latter seems closer to the negated assertion.

I can believe that some might view things as such. Personally, I look  
to the logical equivalence and say they say the exact same thing.

> In a more general context, given that there might be multiple ways  
> of saying the
> same thing, would it be of interest to propose best practices/style  
> guides for
> these situations?

I don't know. Certainly there is value in explaining that and how  
they mean the same thing.

> At the same time, I think this syntactic sugar offers a big value  
> add for
> ontology authors seeking to develop simpler ontologies.
> ---Vipul
> The information transmitted in this electronic communication is  
> intended only
> for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain  
> confidential
> and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,  
> dissemination or other
> use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by  
> persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you  
> received this
> information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at  
> 800-856-1983 and
> properly dispose of this information.

Received on Sunday, 8 June 2008 18:45:59 UTC