Re: [Owlim-discussion] Custom function for custom rule
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/owlim-discussion@ontotext.com/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 +, 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: barry.bis...@ontotext.com 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 OWLIM-discussion@ontotext.com http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion ___ OWLIM-discussion mailing list OWLIM-discussion@ontotext.com http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
Re: [Owlim-discussion] Custom function for custom rule
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: barry.bis...@ontotext.com 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 OWLIM-discussion@ontotext.com http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion ___ OWLIM-discussion mailing list OWLIM-discussion@ontotext.com http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
[Owlim-discussion] Custom function for custom rule
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 OWLIM-discussion@ontotext.com http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
