To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Przemyslaw Jaskierski <przemjaskier@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:51:31 +0200 |
Message-id: | <CAM81Rh02v68fYwQb7PSk0RtHYUr9r9R4eEfRMQ_itwDQ_Ww0iw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Hello, thank you for your replies.
My example just shows model logically equivalent to much more complex one that I'm working on as a POC for logic programming with OWL. I need to simply make a GOOD/BAD classification of an individual - based on the class types of 1..n of individuals connected to him by a hasX property. Making subclasses for this classification makes sense for me - I'm searching a solution for what looks like a trivial problem - making PositiveVoteResult and NegativeVoteResult separate classes changes nothing - NegativeVoteResult is set properly and PositiveVoteResult is never set for an individual that supposed to match the condition. > OWL is a restricted subset of logic, and Protege is a tool. > Neither one is useful for this problem. Ok, but I have to use Protege/OWL here. I have an impression that it can be done, but I'm missing something trivial here. If one trivial cardinality restriction works good and another trivial (complementary/opposite???) restriction does not, maybe the solution is really simple? I mean, if such trivial thing can't be expressed there is something really bad with this technology... Best regards, Przemek _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01) |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Laws: physical and social, Steven Ericsson-Zenith |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Strange problem with cardinality restrictions, Michael Brunnbauer |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Strange problem with cardinality restrictions, John F Sowa |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Strange problem with cardinality restrictions, William Frank |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |