Re: dependency analysis of OWL axioms

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Obrst, Leo J. <lobrst@mitre.org> wrote:
> 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.

For example, in OWL 2 DL one can take all (class) axioms and re-write
all that into a single long GCI.

Cheers,
Pavel

>
> 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 Saturday, 15 November 2014 10:08:47 UTC