Re: OWL Web Ontology Language

From: "Danny Ayers" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: OWL Web Ontology Language
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 21:21:46 +0100

> On 3/16/06, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> 
> > > How to express that a child has a preference for dogs rather than cats as a
> > > pet?
> > > - A given child is an individual with property "hasPetPreference".
> > > - A dog or a cat is a class (we should allow for identifying an actual beast
> > > as an individual having class dog or cat).
> 
> > All that said, there is an effort to extend OWL in a way that gives you a
> > light-weight way to at least state a relationship between an individual and a
> > class.  In this extension, OWL 1.1, class names can be also used as names of
> > individuals,
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong Peter, but isn't that already possible in OWL
> Full? 

Yes, indeed, this is possible in OWL Full, as well.

> (Ok, I assume the way it's done in OWL 1.1 is more tractable,
> but the question was only how to express the information).
> 
> There are other possibilities for modelling the scenario, a quick crack -
> 
> :Cat a owl:Class .
> :Dog a owl:Class .
> 
> :CatPreferrer :prefers :Cat .
> :DogPreferrer :prefers :Dog .
> 
> :CatPreferrer a owl:Class .
> :DogPreferrer a owl:Class .
> 
> _:susan a :Child .
> _:susan a :DogPreferer .
> 
> does that work? 

Yes, this gets a very similar effect.

[...]

> Cheers,
> Danny.

peter

Received on Thursday, 16 March 2006 20:34:51 UTC