- From: Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@dfki.de>
- Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:54:55 +0100
- To: Hans Teijgeler <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl>
- CC: "'Paul Gearon'" <gearon@ieee.org>, "'SW-forum'" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "'Chris Wilper'" <cwilper@cs.cornell.edu>, "Manola, Frank" <fmanola@acm.org>
- Message-ID: <454DFB3F.9090204@dfki.de>
Hi Hans, have you looked into Reification and did you try it out for your problem? checkout reification, it will do what you need. http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/#RDFReification http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-primer-20040210/#reification Or read this article, which explains why Reification may be what you may need: or if you should go for indivivduals http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/ greetings Leo Es begab sich aber da Hans Teijgeler zur rechten Zeit 05.11.2006 10:47 folgendes schrieb: > Hi Paul, > > Thanks for your response! (and thanks as well to Chris and Frank). > > Let me explain this with a simple example: > > * > John isInvolvedWith Jane > * > Jane's father Pete givesApprovalTo that relationship > > This means that the isInvolvedWith relationship is the rdf:object of > the predicate 'givesApprovalTo'. > > We then also want to represent the owl:Restriction that Fathers > approve such relationships of their daughters (granted, it's a bit > old-fashioned, but it's just an example). > > This example is not rare. Another one is: > > * > Nozzle N1 isWeldedTo Vessel V1 > * > that welded connection isInspectedBy John > > I guess that I should start using reification, but quite honestly I am > too dumb to understand the text in [1] > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#Reif > > Is reification at all possible in an OWL environment? It seems not to > be the case. > > Mind you, we define "templates" with Restrictions in OWL that will be > used to validate the zillions of instances of those templates in RDF. > So for example we define, using 15926 model lingo, a template for > DirectConnection of two PossibleIndividuals, and make sure, using > owl:Restrictions, that any instance of that template has an instance > of PossibleIndividual at both sides. These templates can be > specialized by onProperty restrictions to, for example, a template for > welded connections that can only be between instances of > PossibleIndividual that can be welded at all. > > I hope I haven't made this too complex :-) > > Regards, > Hans > > ____________________ > OntoConsult > Hans Teijgeler > ISO 15926 specialist > Netherlands > +31-72-509 2005 > www.InfowebML.ws <http://www.infowebml.ws/> > hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl <mailto:hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Paul Gearon [mailto:gearon@ieee.org] > *Sent:* Saturday, November 04, 2006 23:56 > *To:* Hans Teijgeler > *Cc:* SW-forum > *Subject:* Re: rdf:Property used as rdf:object in a triple > > > On Nov 4, 2006, at 6:25 AM, Hans Teijgeler wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> rdf:Property is a subClassOf rdfs:Resource, so syntactically a >> property could be the rdf:object of a triple. >> >> My question is, whether or not there is something against doing that >> from a semantics/reasoning point of view. >> >> Can anybody shed some light on this? > > There's certainly no rule against it. Reification requires it. So > does rdfs:subPropertyOf. > > As for semantics... you can get away with a lot in RDF. But if you > want to keep things as valid OWL-Lite or OWL-DL then you have to be > more careful, as properties are treated a little differently to other > resources. Properties only start getting back the "privileges" of > other types of resources (like classes) when you get up to OWL-Full. > > Paul > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.13.28/518 - Release Date: > 04-Nov-06 17:30 > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.13.28/518 - Release Date: > 04-Nov-06 17:30 > -- ____________________________________________________ DI Leo Sauermann http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann DFKI GmbH P.O. Box 2080 Fon: +49 631 205-3503 67608 Kaiserslautern Fax: +49 631 205-3472 Germany Mail: leo.sauermann@dfki.de ____________________________________________________
Received on Sunday, 5 November 2006 19:19:41 UTC