W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2004

owl: <Class> <relationship> <individual> - is that okay?

From: <david.celjuska@bt.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 12:15:58 +0100
Message-ID: <0881CE20A5962844A62D246EBB24148F09F8DE03@i2km03-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>


Can an owl class be linked to an individual?

For example I need to express (in tripples):

Flag hasColor whiteColor.
Flag hasColor redColor.

slovakFlag rdf:type Flag.
slovakFlag hasColor blueColor.

flagWhiteRed rdf:type Flag.

Note that Flag is a class and slovakFlag,
whiteColor, blueColor and redColor are individuals.

Is that possible and legal?

I am going to write it in more specific manner:

ex:Flag   rdf:type Class.
ex:Color  rdf:type Class.

then properties:

hasColor rdf:type   rdfs:Property.
hasColor owl:domain Flag.
hasColor owl:range  Color.

then individuals:

whiteColor  rdf:type     Color.
blueColor   rdf:type     Color.
redColor    rdf:type     Color.

My question is, can I have following triples?:

Flag	hasColor	whiteColor
Flag	hasColor	redColor

Would that be okay regarding the OWL language? 

I believe it could also be rewritten with the same
semantic meaning as:

isColorIn owl:inverseOf hasColor.
whiteColor isColorIn Flag.
redColor isColorIn Flag.

The question now is again the last two statements.

Is that all legal? If not, how could I create
a class of which individuals would automaticaly
inherite its property values. I was also looking
at owl:hasValue but this the restricion. 

Thank you for a quick reply,

Received on Monday, 6 September 2004 11:40:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:51 UTC