Re: owl:allValuesFrom inference

>
> On 25 Jun 2009, at 12:30, Sean Bechhofer wrote:
>
>>
>> On 25 Jun 2009, at 11:12, Bernhard Schandl wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> What you want to say is that *if something is madeby a Man (and  
>>>> possibly by some other things), then this something is a  
>>>> ThingMadeByMan.
>>>
>>> exactly.
>>>
>>>> So there direction of the implication needs to go the other way  
>>>> round an you need existential (someValues) restriction... in  
>>>> Manchester Syntax:
>>>>
>>>> Class: ThingMadeByMan
>>>>  EquivalentTo:
>>>>    madeBy some Man
>>>
>>> I'm not too familiar with Manchester Syntax, is this equivalent to  
>>> (n3):
>>>
>>> ex:ThingMadeByMan
>>>   a owl:Restriction ;
>>>   owl:onProperty ex:madeBy ;
>>>   owl:someValuesFrom ex:Man ;
>>> .
>>
>> No. The N3 above is only asserting *subclass* here.
>
> <cough> Someone (thanks Peter :-) has pointed out to me that I'm  
> wrong here. The triples above create an owl:Restriction, and then  
> give it a name, which is not quite how I interpreted it. Note that  
> this actually pushes you into OWL Full, as you're not allowed to  
> name a restrictions in OWL DL.
>
>> In M/cr syntax, it's saying:
>>
>> Class: ThingMadeByMan
>>  SubClassOf:
>>    madeBy some Man
>
>
> The counterpart to the M/cr syntax I gave above would actually be  
> something like:
>
> ex:ThingMadeByMan
>   owl:equivalentClass [
>   a owl:Restriction ;
>   owl:onProperty ex:madeBy ;
>   owl:someValuesFrom ex:Man.].
>
> e.g. stating that ThingMadeByMan is equivalent to the appropriate  
> restriction.
>
> As an aside, this also illustrates how easy it is (well, for me at  
> least, anyway :-) to get confused by OWL represented as triples. I'd  
> say it's much easier to see what's going on in an OWL (DL) model if  
> it's presented using something like M/cr syntax.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sean
>
> --
> Sean Bechhofer
> School of Computer Science
> University of Manchester
> sean.bechhofer@...
> http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
>
>
>