RE: dependency analysis of OWL axioms

Pavel,

How is a GCI not representable as a graph? I understand that all OWL ontologies can be represented as graphs, by definition into RDF graphs. Do you mean something else?

Thanks,
Leo

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Pavel Klinov [mailto:pavel.klinov@uni-ulm.de]
>Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2014 5:08 AM
>To: Obrst, Leo J.
>Cc: Pavel Klinov; Leila Bayoudhi; semantic-web@w3.org
>Subject: 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 20:01:54 UTC