- From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:13:42 +0000
- To: Monika Solanki <monika@dmu.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org
On November 10, Monika Solanki writes: > Ian Horrocks wrote: > > >On November 7, Monika Solanki writes: > > > > > >>Hi Ian, > >> > >>Thanks for the reply!!!! > >> > >>I have a confusion regarding "sameIndividualAtom". Although I have dome > >>some kind of refinement over my earlier version, that did not use > >>"sameIndividualAtom", but somehow I still feel that "sameIndividualAtom" > >>is the way to go. > >> > >>I want to restate the problem. > >> > >>I define a variable > >> > >><owl:Variable rdf:ID="acctID"/> > >> > >>and I have an individual of class Input defined as > >> > >><process:Input rdf:ID="AccID"> > >>.... > >>.... > >></process:Input> > >> > >>Now, what I want to say is that the variable is actually an individual > >>and is the same as the individual, AcctID, and this is the one which > >>should be used for defining further property predicates. > >> > >>I feel, I can use "sameIndividualAtom" to express this and the > >>semantics would not be affected, so will this be valid? > >> > >><owl: sameIndividualAtom > > >> <owl:Variable rdf:about ="#acctID"/> > >> <owl::Individual rdf:about="AcctID"/> > >></owl:sameIndividualAtom> > >> > >>I have changed owl:name to rdf:about > >> > >> > > > >This is a legal atom. It is satisfied by a binding just in case the > >variable and the individual are interpreted as the same object. I'm > >not quite sure, though, why you would want to do this rather than just > >using the individual itself for defining further property predicates. > > > > > Oh, I thought that was not allowed. I was under the impression that only > elements defined as variables can be used within property predicates, or > does it mean that I can declare variabls. to be an individual e.g > > <process:Input rdf:ID="AccID"> > .... > .... > </process:Input> > > <owl:Variable rdf:about="#AcctID"/> > > Will this be correct?, if so, it will be very convenient to use. No, this wont be correct. Now I am confused as to what you mean by "defining further property predicates". As it makes clear in the proposal, either variables or OWL individuals can be used in property atoms. I.e., a property atom is of the form P(x,y), where x,y can be any mixture of variables and OWL individuals. My point about using variables is that I can't see why you would want to make the variable acctID have the same interpretation as the individual AcctID, because you can write P(AcctID,y) just as easily as P(acctID,y). Ian > > >Ian > > > > > > > > > >>Thanks, > >> > >>Monika > >> > >>Ian Horrocks wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>On November 1, Monika Solanki writes: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Hello Ian and Peter, > >>>> > >>>>I have been studying the OWL Rule language. I am a bit confused over > >>>>the interpretation atoms in general and Class atom in particular. > >>>> > >>>>As mentioned in the doc, > >>>>Informally, an atom C(x) holds if x is an instance of the class > >>>>description C > >>>> > >>>>So, what is the interpretation of this: > >>>> > >>>><owlx:classAtom> > >>>> <owlx:Class owlx:name="Person" /> > >>>> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" /> > >>>></owlx:classAtom> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Does it mean that x1 is an instance of Class C ? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>Informally, if it is in an antecedent then it is a condition that is > >>>satisfied whenever x1 binds to an object that is an instance of C; if > >>>it is in a consequent, then it is an assertion that the object x1 is > >>>bound to is an instance of C. > >>> > >>>Ian > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Thanks, > >>>> > >>>>Monika > >>>> > >>>>-- > >>>>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > >>>>Monika Solanki > >>>>Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > >>>>De Montfort University > >>>>Hawthorn building, H00.18 > >>>>The Gateway > >>>>Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > >>>> > >>>>phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > >>>>email: monika@dmu.ac.uk > >>>>web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika > >>>>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>-- > >>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > >>Monika Solanki > >>Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > >>De Montfort University > >>Hawthorn building, H00.18 > >>The Gateway > >>Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > >> > >>phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > >>email: monika@dmu.ac.uk > >>web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika > >>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > >> > >><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > >><html> > >><head> > >> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> > >> <title></title> > >></head> > >><body> > >>Hi Ian,<br> > >><br> > >>Thanks for the reply!!!!<br> > >><br> > >>I have a confusion regarding "sameIndividualAtom". Although I have dome some > >>kind of refinement over my earlier version, that did not use "sameIndividualAtom", > >>but somehow I still feel that "sameIndividualAtom" is the way to go.<br> > >><br> > >>I want to restate the problem.<br> > >><br> > >>I define a variable <br> > >><br> > >><owl:Variable rdf:ID="acctID"/><br> > >><br> > >>and I have an individual of class Input defined as <br> > >><br> > >><process:Input rdf:ID="AccID"><br> > >>....<br> > >>....<br> > >></process:Input><br> > >><br> > >>Now, what I want to say is that the variable is actually an individual and > >>is the same as the individual, AcctID, and this is the one which should be > >>used for defining further property predicates. <br> > >><br> > >>I feel, I can use "sameIndividualAtom" to express this and the semantics > >>would not be affected, so will this be valid?<br> > >><br> > >><owl: sameIndividualAtom ><br> > >> <owl:Variable rdf:about ="#acctID"/><br> > >> <owl::Individual rdf:about="AcctID"/><br> > >></owl:sameIndividualAtom><br> > >><br> > >>I have changed owl:name to rdf:about <br> > >><br> > >>Thanks,<br> > >><br> > >>Monika<br> > >><br> > >>Ian Horrocks wrote:<br> > >><blockquote type="cite" > >> cite="mid16298.45218.115266.619802@merlin.horrocks.net"> > >> <pre wrap="">On November 1, Monika Solanki writes: > >> </pre> > >> <blockquote type="cite"> > >> <pre wrap="">Hello Ian and Peter, > >> > >>I have been studying the OWL Rule language. I am a bit confused over > >>the interpretation atoms in general and Class atom in particular. > >> > >>As mentioned in the doc, > >>Informally, an atom C(x) holds if x is an instance of the class > >>description C > >> > >>So, what is the interpretation of this: > >> > >><owlx:classAtom> > >> <owlx:Class owlx:name="Person" /> > >> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" /> > >></owlx:classAtom> > >> > >> > >>Does it mean that x1 is an instance of Class C ? > >> </pre> > >> </blockquote> > >> <pre wrap=""><!----> > >>Informally, if it is in an antecedent then it is a condition that is > >>satisfied whenever x1 binds to an object that is an instance of C; if > >>it is in a consequent, then it is an assertion that the object x1 is > >>bound to is an instance of C. > >> > >>Ian > >> > >> </pre> > >> <blockquote type="cite"> > >> <pre wrap="">Thanks, > >> > >>Monika > >> > >>-- > >>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > >>Monika Solanki > >>Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > >>De Montfort University > >>Hawthorn building, H00.18 > >>The Gateway > >>Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > >> > >>phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > >>email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a> > >>web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a> > >>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > >> </pre> > >> </blockquote> > >> <pre wrap=""><!----> > >> </pre> > >></blockquote> > >><br> > >><div class="moz-signature">-- <br> > >>**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > >><br> > >> Monika Solanki<br> > >> Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)<br> > >> De Montfort University<br> > >> Hawthorn building, H00.18 <br> > >> The Gateway <br> > >> Leicester LE1 9BH, UK <br> > >><br> > >> phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 <br> > >> email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a> <br> > >> web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a><br> > >> **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**</div> > >><br> > >></body> > >></html> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > Monika Solanki > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > De Montfort University > Hawthorn building, H00.18 > The Gateway > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > email: monika@dmu.ac.uk > web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > > > -- > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > Monika Solanki > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > De Montfort University > Hawthorn building, H00.18 > The Gateway > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > email: monika@dmu.ac.uk > web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > <html> > <head> > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> > <title></title> > </head> > <body> > > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> > <title></title> > Ian Horrocks wrote:<br> > > <blockquote type="cite" > cite="mid16302.37274.786945.145027@merlin.horrocks.net"> > <pre wrap="">On November 7, Monika Solanki writes: > </pre> > > <blockquote type="cite"> > <pre wrap="">Hi Ian, > > Thanks for the reply!!!! > > I have a confusion regarding "sameIndividualAtom". Although I have dome > some kind of refinement over my earlier version, that did not use > "sameIndividualAtom", but somehow I still feel that "sameIndividualAtom" > is the way to go. > > I want to restate the problem. > > I define a variable > > <owl:Variable rdf:ID="acctID"/> > > and I have an individual of class Input defined as > > <process:Input rdf:ID="AccID"> > .... > .... > </process:Input> > > Now, what I want to say is that the variable is actually an individual > and is the same as the individual, AcctID, and this is the one which > should be used for defining further property predicates. > > I feel, I can use "sameIndividualAtom" to express this and the > semantics would not be affected, so will this be valid? > > <owl: sameIndividualAtom > > <owl:Variable rdf:about ="#acctID"/> > <owl::Individual rdf:about="AcctID"/> > </owl:sameIndividualAtom> > > I have changed owl:name to rdf:about > </pre> > </blockquote> > > <pre wrap=""><!----> > This is a legal atom. It is satisfied by a binding just in case the > variable and the individual are interpreted as the same object. I'm > not quite sure, though, why you would want to do this rather than just > using the individual itself for defining further property predicates. > </pre> > </blockquote> > Oh, I thought that was not allowed. I was under the impression that only > elements defined as variables can be used within property predicates, or does > it mean that I can declare variabls. to be an individual e.g > <pre wrap=""><process:Input rdf:ID="AccID"> > .... > .... > </process:Input></pre> > > <pre wrap=""><owl:Variable rdf:about="#AcctID"/></pre> > Will this be correct?, if so, it will be very convenient to use.<br> > <br> > > <blockquote type="cite" > cite="mid16302.37274.786945.145027@merlin.horrocks.net"> > <pre wrap="">Ian > > > </pre> > > <blockquote type="cite"> > <pre wrap="">Thanks, > > Monika > > Ian Horrocks wrote: > > </pre> > > <blockquote type="cite"> > <pre wrap="">On November 1, Monika Solanki writes: > > > </pre> > > <blockquote type="cite"> > <pre wrap="">Hello Ian and Peter, > > I have been studying the OWL Rule language. I am a bit confused over > the interpretation atoms in general and Class atom in particular. > > As mentioned in the doc, > Informally, an atom C(x) holds if x is an instance of the class > description C > > So, what is the interpretation of this: > > <owlx:classAtom> > <owlx:Class owlx:name="Person" /> > <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" /> > </owlx:classAtom> > > > Does it mean that x1 is an instance of Class C ? > > > </pre> > </blockquote> > > <pre wrap="">Informally, if it is in an antecedent then it is a condition that is > satisfied whenever x1 binds to an object that is an instance of C; if > it is in a consequent, then it is an assertion that the object x1 is > bound to is an instance of C. > > Ian > > > > </pre> > > <blockquote type="cite"> > <pre wrap="">Thanks, > > Monika > > -- > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > Monika Solanki > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > De Montfort University > Hawthorn building, H00.18 > The Gateway > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > email: <a > class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a> > web: <a > class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/%7Emonika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a> > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > > > </pre> > </blockquote> > > <pre wrap=""> > > </pre> > </blockquote> > > <pre wrap="">-- > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > Monika Solanki > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > De Montfort University > Hawthorn building, H00.18 > The Gateway > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > email: <a > class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a> > web: <a > class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/%7Emonika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a> > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > <html> > <head> > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> > <title></title> > </head> > <body> > Hi Ian,<br> > <br> > Thanks for the reply!!!!<br> > <br> > I have a confusion regarding "sameIndividualAtom". Although I have dome some > kind of refinement over my earlier version, that did not use "sameIndividualAtom", > but somehow I still feel that "sameIndividualAtom" is the way to go.<br> > <br> > I want to restate the problem.<br> > <br> > I define a variable <br> > <br> > &lt;owl:Variable rdf:ID="acctID"/&gt;<br> > <br> > and I have an individual of class Input defined as <br> > <br> > &lt;process:Input rdf:ID="AccID"&gt;<br> > ....<br> > ....<br> > &lt;/process:Input&gt;<br> > <br> > Now, what I want to say is that the variable is actually an individual and > is the same as the individual, AcctID, and this is the one which should be > used for defining further property predicates. <br> > <br> > I feel, I can use "sameIndividualAtom" &nbsp;to express this and the semantics > would not be affected, so will this be valid?<br> > <br> > &lt;owl: sameIndividualAtom &gt;<br> > &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;owl:Variable rdf:about ="#acctID"/&gt;<br> > &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;owl::Individual rdf:about="AcctID"/&gt;<br> > &lt;/owl:sameIndividualAtom&gt;<br> > <br> > I have changed owl:name to rdf:about <br> > <br> > Thanks,<br> > <br> > Monika<br> > <br> > Ian Horrocks wrote:<br> > <blockquote type="cite" > cite=<a > class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" > href="mailto:mid16298.45218.115266.619802@merlin.horrocks.net">"mid16298.45218.115266.619802@merlin.horrocks.net"</a>> > <pre wrap="">On November 1, Monika Solanki writes: > </pre> > <blockquote type="cite"> > <pre wrap="">Hello Ian and Peter, > > I have been studying the OWL Rule language. I am a bit confused over > the interpretation atoms in general and Class atom in particular. > > As mentioned in the doc, > Informally, an atom C(x) holds if x is an instance of the class > description C > > So, what is the interpretation of this: > > &lt;owlx:classAtom&gt; > &lt;owlx:Class owlx:name="Person" /&gt; > &lt;owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" /&gt; > &lt;/owlx:classAtom&gt; > > > Does it mean that x1 is an instance of Class C ? > </pre> > </blockquote> > <pre wrap=""><!----> > Informally, if it is in an antecedent then it is a condition that is > satisfied whenever x1 binds to an object that is an instance of C; if > it is in a consequent, then it is an assertion that the object x1 is > bound to is an instance of C. > > Ian > > </pre> > <blockquote type="cite"> > <pre wrap="">Thanks, > > Monika > > -- > **&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;** > Monika Solanki > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) > De Montfort University > Hawthorn building, H00.18 > The Gateway > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK > > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 > email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href=<a > class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">"mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk"</a>><a > class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a></a> > web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href=<a > class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/%7Emonika">"http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika"</a>><a > class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/%7Emonika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a></a> > **&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;** > </pre> > </blockquote> > <pre wrap=""><!----> > </pre> > </blockquote> > <br> > <div class="moz-signature">-- <br> > **&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;** > <br> > Monika Solanki<br> > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)<br> > De Montfort University<br> > Hawthorn building, H00.18 <br> > The Gateway <br> > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK <br> > <br> > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 <br> > email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href=<a > class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">"mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk"</a>><a > class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a></a> <br> > web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href=<a > class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/%7Emonika">"http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika"</a>><a > class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/%7Emonika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a></a><br> > **&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**&gt;&gt;&lt;&lt;**</div> > <br> > </body> > </html> > </pre> > </blockquote> > > <pre wrap=""><!----> > </pre> > </blockquote> > <br> > > <div class="moz-signature">-- <br> > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > <br> > Monika Solanki<br> > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)<br> > De Montfort University<br> > Hawthorn building, H00.18 <br> > The Gateway <br> > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK <br> > <br> > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 <br> > email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a> <br> > web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" > href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/%7Emonika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a><br> > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**</div> > <br> > <br> > <div class="moz-signature">-- <br> > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** > <br> > Monika Solanki<br> > Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL)<br> > De Montfort University<br> > Hawthorn building, H00.18 <br> > The Gateway <br> > Leicester LE1 9BH, UK <br> > <br> > phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 <br> > email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:monika@dmu.ac.uk">monika@dmu.ac.uk</a> <br> > web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika">http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika</a><br> > **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**</div> > </body> > </html>
Received on Monday, 10 November 2003 05:20:13 UTC