Baitiah; Also note that the rule can be written in SPARQL:
CONSTRUCT {?x :uncle ?z}
WHERE
{ ?x :parent ?y .
?y :brother ?z .
}
Add this to the spin:rule of owl:Thing, configure inferences to run
TopSPIN, and execute inferences. The result will be the same, with
the advantage that SPARQL is a W3C standard syntax.
-- Scott
On Mar 28, 1:28 am, Holger Knublauch <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2011, at 3:09 PM, Baitiah Ambiah wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> > I have questions about SWRL rules execution.
>
> > For example :
> > uncle(?x,?z) <- parent(?x,?y) ∧ brother(?y,?z) .
>
> > In topbraid or by the rules execution process itself, how the sequence
> > of the conditions being executed?
>
> > Means, is the execution of condition is front-back or back-front ?
> > Front-back means, it will execute parent(?x,?y) followed by brother(?
> > y,?z), or is it back-front , brother(?y,?z) followed by parent(?x,?
> > y) ?
>
> The SWRL implementation of TopBraid uses the Jena rule engine, which by
> default is set to use a combination of backward and forward chaining.
>
>
>
> > How about SPIN? also the same approach , either front-back or back-
> > front?
>
> TopSPIN usually executes forward chaining, i.e. first the WHERE clause then
> CONSTRUCT, then WHERE on the results of the previous CONSTRUCT etc. However
> you can do backward chaining with user-defined SPIN functions and magic
> properties.
>
> Holger
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include TopBraid Composer,
TopBraid Live, TopBraid Ensemble, SPARQLMotion and SPIN.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-users?hl=en
