W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > April 2004

Re: [UNITS] FAQ : Constraints on data values range

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 23:38:06 +0200
To: "Pat Hayes <phayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: "Bernard Vatant" <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, "SWBPD" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFF8141C54.28A93288-ONC1256E78.0075B8ED-C1256E78.0076AB7C@agfa.com>

>> I have not noticed any activity under [UNITS] so 
>> far ... this is a first bait :))
>>
>> A FAQ in Protégé-OWL list, I'll give here the 
>> latest variant sent yesterday (summed up)
>>
>> "I have defined a class 'Wheel'
>> and a DatatypeProperty 'diameterValue'
>> on Domain 'Wheel'
>> and Range 'Integer'
>>
>> I want to create a class 'BigWheel' with a restriction on the property
>> 'diameterValue', for instance 'diameterValue => 10'.
>>
>> How do I do that in OWL?"
>
> You mean in OWL-DL, right? You can't.  There are 
> lots of workarounds you can use, but the short 
> answer is that you can't say what you want to 
> say. In OWL-Full this is a two-step restriction 
> (assuming you have some property corresponding to 
> '=>' available:)
>
> BigWheel onProperty diameterValue .
> BigWheel allValuesFrom _:x .
> _;x onProperty greaterThan .
> _:x hasValue "9"^^xsd:integer .


I thought you meant with '=>' log:implies :)
and so, I wrote it as

{?W a :Wheel; :diameterValue ?D. ?D math:greaterThan 9} => {?W a 
:BigWheel}.

which means what is says...
isn't that a semantic web best practice

| Rather than imposing a uniform 
| blanket restriction on all ontology 
| expressiveness, what we should be doing is 
| letting people say what they mean

??

-- 
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 16 April 2004 17:57:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:30:53 UTC