- From: Hans Teijgeler <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:05:09 +0200
- To: <doug.foxvog@deri.org>, <semantic-web@w3.org>, <semantic-web-request@w3.org>
Doug,
This just dropped in my inbox, but it is dated 4 days ago, and its contents
are, superfically seen, the same as you sent earlier. A hick-up of the
e-mail universe?
Regards,
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of doug foxvog
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 6:11 PM
To: semantic-web@w3.org; semantic-web-request@w3.org;
hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl
Subject: [Fwd: [deri-research] FW: OWL Full reasoning]
> From: semantic-web-request@w3.org
[mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Hans Teijgeler
> Sent: Donnerstag, 18. August 2005 14:50
> To: semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: OWL Full reasoning
> Hi,
> I have worked out an example of a reasoning problem that we have:
> http://www.infowebml.ws/topics/RDF-OWL/85-reasoning/example.htm
There are some problems with the description in this example resulting
from inconsistency as to whether various classes are first-order
(classes of individuals) or second-order (classes of classes of
individual) or even third order (classes of classes of classes of
individual). Consistency here is necessary before any attempt is
made for reasoning to solve the problem.
* The description of ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5 indicate that it is
a second-order class, i.e. its instances are first-order classes, yet
the question is posed whether an instance of DirectConnection, i.e.
an individual, is an instance of a subClassOf of
ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5 both in the text and in the figure.
+ As a second-order class, this should probably be renamed
ValidConnectionTypePerANSI-B16.5
+ The class of all valid connections Per ANSI-B16.5 is useful, having
2"-150/300#RFFlangedConnection as a subclass. This corresponds to
the existing name, ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5, but would not be an
instance (much less a subclass) of ClassOfClasses. It would be
typed as a ClassOfIndividual.
* The figure depicts ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5 as a third-order
class, i.e. its instances are second-order classes, because the
link between it and ClassOfClasses is subClassOf instead of type.
This should be a type link if the second-order class were meant.
* The three classes, ClassOfDirectConnection, ClassOfIndividual, and
ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject are first-order collections according
to one set of depicted links, yet second-order collections according
to another set of links. Assuming these are intended to be second-
order collections:
+ The link from 2"-300#RFFlange to ClassOfIndividual should be
type, not subClassOf
+ The link from 2"-300#RFFlange to ClassOfIndividual should be
type, not subClassOf
+ The link from 2"-150/300#RFFlangedConnection to
ClassOfDirectConnection should be type, not subClassOf
* The links from DirectConnection to PossibleIndividual should be
classOfSide1 and classOfSide2 instead of side1 and side2
* The classOfSide1 and classOfSide2 links from ClassOfDirectConnection
to ClassOfIndividual have different meaning than the classOfSide1 and
classOfSide2 depicted from 2"-150/300#RFFlangedConnection. Those from
2"... indicate that any side1 link from an instance of 2"150/300... is
an instance of 2"-300#RFFlange (and side2 links are instances of
2"-150#RFFlange).
The links from ClassOfDirectConnection should be classOfClassOfSide1/2
indicating that instances of ClassOfDirectConnection should have
classOfSide1/2 to instances of ClassOfIndividual.
* The first check in Reasoning for Phase 2 should check whether there is
a subClassOf DirectConnection, not of ClassOfDirectConnection, with
the described properties. This class should be *typed* with the
class, ClassOfDirectConnection.
* The second check should be whether the found OWL class is typed with
the *instance*, not subClassOf, ClassOfClass labelled
ValidConnectionTYPEPerANSI-B16.5 . Alternatively, it could check
whether the found class was a subClassOf a re-defined
ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5, which would be a subClassOf
DirectConnection (and be typed with ClassOfIndividual).
For the figure, the following type relations should hold:
Individuals of type
DirectConnection-Yellow DirectConnection
FlangeOnPipeA265h PhysicalObject, 2"-150#RFFlange
FlangeOnPumpP101 PhysicalObject, 2"-300#RFFlange
First-Order Classes
DirectConnection ClassOfDirectConnection
PossibleIndividual ClassOfIndividual
PhysicalObject ClassOfIndividual
2"-150/300#RFFlangedConnection *ValidConnectionTypePerANSI-B16.5
2"-300#RFFlange ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
2"-150#RFFlange ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5* ClassOfDirectConnection
Second-Order Classes
ClassOfDirectConnection ClassOfClasses
ClassOfIndividual ClassOfClasses
ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject ClassOfClasses
ValidConnectionTypePerANSI-B16.5 ClassOfClasses
subClassOf relations should obtain between:
PhysicalObject PossibleIndividual
DirectConnection PossibleIndividual (?)
2"-150#RFFlange PhysicalObject
2"-300#RFFlange PhysicalObject
2"-150/300#RFFlangedConnection ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5
ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5 DirectConnection
ValidConnectionTypePerANSI-B16.5 ClassOfDirectConnection
ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject ClassOfIndividual
ClassOfDirectConnection ClassOfIndividual
* Note that the figure does not have both ValidConnectionPerANSI-B16.5
and ValidConnectionTypePerANSI-B16.5
> I have the following questions to the OWL community:
> 1. Given the fact that this is clearly an implementation of OWL
> Full, can any OWL reasoner handle this at present?
It has to be cleaned up if anything is to handle it.
I don't know of a OWL-Full reasoner.
OpenCyc can currently handle the cleaned-up version (if encoded in CycL
instead of in OWL).
> 2. If not yet, may we realistically expect such a capability to
> be available by the year 2010?
> 3. And if not, why is there OWL Full?
> Regards,
> Hans
> _______________________
> Hans Teijgeler
> ISO 15926 specialist
> <http://www.InfowebML.ws> www.InfowebML.ws
> <mailto:hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl> hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl
> phone +31-72-509 2005
==========================================================
douglas foxvog doug.foxvog@deri.org +353 (91) 495 150
Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI)
National University of Ireland, Galway
Galway, Ireland http://www.deri.ie
==========================================================
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2005 09:05:25 UTC