- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 17:39:13 +0100
- To: Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>
- Cc: SW-forum Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAK4ZFVHD9h4fBWjM14kB8gkGrP6VjVP4fms4aSQBh+qP7izamA@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Victor Not sure it's a great idea for me to answer in the face of all the OWL gurus you have attracted :) But ... why not an enumerated class using owl:oneOf with a single element in the list ? :C a owl:Class ; owl:equivalentClass [ a owl:Class ; owl:oneOf (:x) ]. For me it looks like :C is thus defined by the extension {:x}. ... or do I miss something more subtle? 2014-11-17 17:23 GMT+01:00 Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@istc.cnr.it>: > I was suggesting a pragmatic answer, which requires a quite trivial query, > since it only acts on the closed world of existing triples and named > classes of a dataset. Of course, if we generalize the problem to any > possible class, including entailment regimes, skolems, class constructions, > then you’re right. > > > On Nov 17, 2014, at 4:49:13 PM , Peter F. Patel-Schneider < > pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Writing a SPARQL construct query to determine which classes are de facto > singletons is not possible, as far as I can tell. There are very many ways > for an OWL class to be a de facto singleton beside being equivalent to a > singleton set. For example, the class could be equivalent to the > intersection of two sets that have single member in common. > > > > It is also possible for non-class axioms to produce de facto singleton > OWL classes. For example what might look to be a doubleton could be turned > into a singleton by a sameAs. > > > > In general, SPARQL is not powerful enough to analyze OWL classes. > > > > peter > > > > > > On 11/17/2014 07:32 AM, Aldo Gangemi wrote: > >> I think you need to preprocess your data with a sparql construct query > to find > >> out what classes are de facto singletons, and to assign those classes a > >> punning type such as :Singleton. After that, you can use Ada. > >> Best > >> Aldo > >> > >> On Monday, November 17, 2014, Peter F. Patel-Schneider < > pfpschneider@gmail.com > >> <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> I'm having a very hard time coming up with any overlap between this > >> discussion and anything that might happen in the RDF data shapes > working > >> group. The working group is about detecting explicit information in > RDF > >> documents---this discussion is about how to create singleton > classes, and > >> maybe how to detect such singleton classes in an RDF encoding. > >> > >> That said, SPARQL is used in several of the technologies being > >> investigated by the working group and it is probably possible to > write a > >> SPARQL query to detect a singleton class in the RDF encoding of OWL, > but > >> this doesn't provide any true commonality. > >> > >> peter > >> > >> > >> On 11/17/2014 01:50 AM, Phil Archer wrote: > >> > >> This sort of debate is exactly the kind of thing that is behind > the newly > >> formed RDF Data Shapes working group. Its charter includes > pointers to > >> a bunch > >> of existing work in this area that may be useful. > >> > >> See http://www.w3.org/2014/data-__shapes/ > >> <http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/> > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> Phil. > >> > >> > >> On 16/11/2014 23:03, Pavel Klinov wrote: > >> > >> There's no simpler encoding. Nominals is the only feature in > OWL 2 > >> which lets you say that a class has a single instance. And > it has a > >> unique serialization in RDF. > >> > >> I don't think querying for this particular syntactic > construct is > >> complex. > >> > >> However, writing RDF queries for OWL ontologies serialized > in RDF (be > >> that SPARQL or other RDF graph matching language) is usually > not a > >> great idea. You'll often have to deal with specifics of the > RDF > >> serialization which is complex for many OWL constructs (see > [1]) > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Pavel > >> > >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-__mapping-to-rdf/ > >> <http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-mapping-to-rdf/> > >> > >> On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 11:35 PM, Victor Porton < > porton@narod.ru> > >> wrote: > >> > >> Your solution has the same problem as Patrick Logan's > one. > >> (See my previous > >> email.) In fact your solution is the same as Patrick > Logan's one. > >> > >> 17.11.2014, 00:28, "Pavel Klinov" < > pavel.klinov@uni-ulm.de>: > >> > >> Sorry, my previous email got sent too soon. > >> > >> Here's the link to the right place in the OWL 2 spec: > >> > >> > http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-__syntax/#Enumeration_of___Individuals > >> < > http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Enumeration_of_Individuals> > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Pavel > >> > >> On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Victor Porton > >> <porton@narod.ru> wrote: > >> > >> Is there any advise on how to code in RDFS or > OWL > >> the following statement? > >> > >> "The class X has exactly one element." > >> > >> -- > >> Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > -- *Bernard Vatant* Vocabularies & Data Engineering Tel : + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59 Skype : bernard.vatant http://google.com/+BernardVatant -------------------------------------------------------- *Mondeca* 35 boulevard de Strasbourg 75010 Paris www.mondeca.com Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews <http://twitter.com/#%21/mondecanews> ----------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 17 November 2014 16:40:01 UTC