Re: Question about the Time Ontology

Hi Michael and all,

I’ve implemented not a reasoner but something related: 

OWL TIME Functions
https://github.com/RDFLib/timefuncs

Just as GeoSPARQL has functions that match predicates, e.g. sfWithin() == geo:sfWithin, I’ve implemented things like isBefore(), isDuring() etc. 

There is more flexibility in these functions than in GeoSPARQL actually: a function can test both RDF paths to get a result and also calculate a result based in literal time values. GeoSPARQL only works on literal calculations.

Those functions could be applied to data to somewhat emulate a temporal reasoner! They are efficient in that they will seek RDF path following outcomes before literal calculation, so this puts them in the same mode of operations as any rule reasoner. 

I would be happy to work on packaging up the functions to act as a reasoner. They need a wrapping layer to ensure they run against a whole dataset efficiently since they weren’t actually designed as a reasoner. 

Cheers,

Nick

— 
Dr Nicholas Car
Data Systems Architect
SURROUND Australia
0477 560 177
nicholas.car@surroundaustralia.com

> On 23 Apr 2022, at 8:32 pm, Michael DeBellis <mdebellissf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I apologize if this isn't the correct forum, if it isn't and someone could point me to the appropriate person/group to ask I would appreciate it. I've been looking at the W3C Time ontology which as I understand it is part of the work of this group. It seems to me that no one has implemented a temporal reasoner for the ontology at this point. E.g., the ontology can represent two intervals I1 and I2 such that I1 overlaps I2 but there is no reasoner to assert that property relation. I think this could be done with the basic temporal operators in SWRL but before I tried doing that I wanted to make sure that: 
> 
> 1) Such a temporal reasoner doesn't currently exist and 
> 
> 2) As far as we know, no one is currently building such a reasoner. 
> 
> Thanks, 
> Michael DeBellis
> michaeldebellis.com