W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > November 2014

RE: dependency analysis of OWL axioms

From: Obrst, Leo J. <lobrst@mitre.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 21:51:21 +0000
To: Pavel Klinov <pavel.klinov@uni-ulm.de>
CC: Leila Bayoudhi <bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FDFBC56B2482EE48850DB651ADF7FEB03534142B@IMCMBX04.MITRE.ORG>
Thanks, Pavel.

My question is about your comment:

"OWL is quite a rich language and one can write very complex axioms which don't look anything graph-like." 

I'd like to know your thoughts on this.

Thanks!
Leo

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Pavel Klinov [mailto:pavel.klinov@uni-ulm.de]
>Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 3:59 PM
>To: Obrst, Leo J.
>Cc: Leila Bayoudhi; semantic-web@w3.org
>Subject: Re: dependency analysis of OWL axioms
>
>On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Obrst, Leo J. <lobrst@mitre.org> wrote:
>> We had proposed this a number of years ago, but never had time to go down
>that path. More towards trying to infer "integrity constraints" dynamically (yes,
>OWL is Open World; integrity constraints are Closed World). Finding the ripple
>effect of deleting, adding, moving graph nodes that kind of corresponds to
>"referential integrity" (i.e., structural) in the database world. Since all OWL
>ontologies (the axioms) can be represented as graphs, it should be doable. How
>efficiently, I don't know.
>>
>
>I'd be very, very cautious with statements like "OWL axioms can be
>represented as graphs". In what precisely sense can they be
>represented as graphs? OWL is quite a rich language and one can write
>very complex axioms which don't look anything graph-like. Of course,
>one can invoke the OWL2RDF mapping and take the resulting set of
>triples as a (kind of) graph, but I doubt it can be generally useful.
>
>I can imagine that for some very specific tasks, like decomposition
>(as in [1]), a graph-based representation of OWL axioms can be
>helpful. But such use cases (and the corresponding representations)
>tend to be pretty specific rather than generic.
>
>Cheers,
>Pavel
>
>[1] Francisco Martín-Recuerda, Dirk Walther: Axiom Dependency
>Hypergraphs for Fast Atomic Decomposition of Ontologies. Description
>Logics 2014: 299-310
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leo
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Leila Bayoudhi [mailto:bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr]
>>>Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 6:36 AM
>>>To: semantic-web@w3.org
>>>Subject: dependency analysis of OWL axioms
>>>
>>>Hello
>>>I want to know if there is a tool or an approach realizing dependency
>annalysis
>>>of OWL 2 axioms.
>>>Example:
>>>by removing a subClassOf axioms , I want to know affected ones in the
>>>ontology.
>>>Or, can I do it manually by recognizing different types of axioms and
>expecting
>>>relations between them.
>>>Thank you for answering me.
>>>--398296598-735493131-1415964971=3759
>>>Content-Type: text/html; charset=f-8
>>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>
>>><html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-
>>>family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-
>>>serif;font-size:16px"><div>Hello</div><div>I want to know if there is a tool
>or
>>>an approach realizing dependency annalysis of OWL 2
>>>axioms.</div><div>Example:&nbsp;</div><div>by removing a subClassOf
>>>axioms , I want to know affected ones in the ontology.</div><div>Or, can I
>do it
>>>manually by recognizing different types of axioms and expecting relations
>>>between them.</div><div>Thank you for answering
>>>me.</div></div></body></html>
>>>--398296598-735493131-1415964971=3759--
>>>
>>
Received on Friday, 14 November 2014 21:51:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:49:27 UTC