Hi Barry,
thank you for you answer. It helped, I will try to use intermediate
repository, but mostly, I will wait for the new version of OWLIM that
will support the SPARQL inside rules. If that will be ok, I would like
to create a thread at near future and start discuss its topic.
One more thing, could you also please answer me for previous post, that
is
How to use "NOT EXISTS" relationship filter in rule
(http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01234.html)
it is the last key issue that I have for business logic for our
prototype.
with kindest personal regards
miroslav
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 13:08:10 +0000, Barry Bishop wrote:
Hello Miroslav,
The fundamental problem is that the rule language is not expressive
enough for your use-case. The question is what is the best
solution/workaround.
The process you describe below (possibly as a result of speaking to
Ivan) involves using construct queries as 'part of' the reasoning
process. It is not completely clear to me how you intend to do this,
but I can imagine several ways, e.g.
One method would be to use an intermediate repository, where new
statements are 'prepared' by adding them, executing a construct query
to make more statements and adding these. Then copy the result in to
the main repository. (If these go in to their own context then it is
easier to delete them if necessary).
Modifying the reasoner with one or more maths functions will be a
step in the right direction, but a proper solution would involve
something more comprehensive, e.g. SPARQL.
With my current level of understanding of the issue, this is all the
advice I can give.
Regards,
barry
--
Barry Bishop
OWLIM Product Manager
Ontotext AD
Tel: +43 650 2000 237
email: [email protected]
www.ontotext.com
On 22/11/11 09:36, Miroslav Líška wrote:
Dear sirs,
let me please reopen the talk about reasoning in OWLIM/SESAME. Ivan
Peikov explained me, that custom rules at the moment do not support
SPARQL 1.1 or some math built-in functions, and he suggest me to use
SPARQL (construct).
I am afraid, that this method will be unusable. Since we want to
work with cca. 1Bilion triples that use serious inference (owl:sameAs,
and many custom rules...) the usability of SPARQL kind reasoning would
look like this:
1. I will load thousands of triples in each batch to the repository,
where the Trree reasoner will use custom rules for business logic.
2. Next I would to use SPARQL insert query above all implicit and
explicit triples, where the conditions will be rules written inside
the SPARQL 1.1
3. I would need to rereason td database again, because I created new
triples based on step 2. Moreover, the lack is that the triples
created in step two are explicit, rather than implicit.
I hope that I explained it well.
Thus let me please ask, is there possibility to write custom
function for the Trree reasoner likewise it is possible to SPARQL
query? Because with custom function in custom query I would need to
use step 1, ie. simple triples loading and automated inference.
With kindest personal regards
miroslav
_______________________________________________
OWLIM-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
_______________________________________________
OWLIM-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
