Re: Exactly one element in a RDFS class

On Nov 17, 2014, at 9:51 AM, Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> wrote:

> As such I will just write:
> 
> :MyClass my:cardinality 1 .
> 

OK, then there are a host of new entailments available. For example, 

ObjectOneOf(A, B, C) my:cardinality 2 .

entails (among other things)

sameAs(A, B) OR sameAs(A, C) OR sameAs(B, C)

Do you have reasoners for all this new stuff? 

By declaring your property to have a semantic meaning that is not expressible in OWL, you have created a semantic extension, a kind of OWL++. Which is fine, as long as you work out the consequences of this properly and publish them for others to use; and if you want anyone else to use it, implement (or pay for the development of) an OWL++ reasoner. . 

Pat Hayes

> 
> (I think, the first of these two signleton definitions is better, as it is more extensible.)
> 
> Now detecting which classes are intended to be singletons for my purposes is trivial.
> 
> 17.11.2014, 17:49, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>:
>> 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
> 
> --
> Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org
> 
> 

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 home
40 South Alcaniz St.            (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile (preferred)
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2014 21:14:37 UTC