- From: Matt Halstead <matt.halstead@auckland.ac.nz>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:08:20 +1200
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
I am beginning to confuse myself with direct subClass relationships in
DAML+OIL. The example follows :
Class A
subClassOf
hasObject X 1* ( means property hasObject hasClass X
with cardinality 1 or more)
Class B
subClassOf A
subClassOf
hasObject Y 1=
subClassOf
hasObject Z 1*
Class X
Class Y
subClassOf X
Class Z
subClassOf X
What I am trying to do
Class A has a property hasObject that can be one or more objects of
class X. Now I want to make a more specialized form of Class A called
Class B that is a subclass of A, but has the restrictions that it needs
exactly one object of Class Y and at least 1 or more objects of Class Z.
Class Y and Z are more specialized forms of Class X. If I take away
the subClass of A restriction of Class B then I can still look at it and
say members of Class B are certainly members of Class A. But now I seem
to have lost the explicit feeling that subClass of A gave, especially
when using an editor such as OilEd.
The interpretation of multiple contraints on the same property
I need to understand if my thinking is correct. The way I interpret
Class B is as follows :
There are 3 anonymous classes that Class B is some function of.
1) the class of all individuals that have at least 1 or more hasObject
properties of type X
2) the class of all individuals that have at exactly 1 property
hasObject of type Y
3) the class of all individuals that have at least 1 or more hasObject
properties of type Z
2) and 3) are subsets of 1)
We now form the conjunction of these restrictions, so that Class B is
the class of individuals that have exactly one hasObject property of
type Y and at least one or more hasObject properties of type Z, and that
this forms a subset of the class of individuals that have 1 or more
hasObject properties of type X. The fact I have used subclass say that
these are necessary, but not sufficient conditions for membership.
Is my interpretation is correct?
regards
Matt
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 23:08:44 UTC