- wrt locked: indeed in "Topbraid", I'll make a new project (strange that in the past I never had this problem...maybe sometime you started to lock stuff there...? - wrt closed world: for references I know that having card constraints , say card=1 and two refs then actually inferred is ref1 = ref2 ...but how does this work with values..like with the areas....you can hardly infer that 23 =42 ..... - anyway I will use the cw-variants....
thanks for patience and help, Michel ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott Henninger Sent: woensdag 21 september 2011 21:57 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [topbraid-users] Re: spin on rectangle Michel, see responses inline: On 9/21/11 1:37 PM, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) wrote: 1. Yes, just before I sent you I cleaned up a bit taking the instances out. When I create 1 instance called Rectangle_1 and do different sets of inputs (and sevral infers) I get multiple values for area. "refersh and show problems' does not flag. 2. But ok, I did not explcitly define my card constraints like your aextra ask query below! I just used normal class axioms, here like "area exactly one" The semantics you are looking for are not supported by OWL. The Open World Assumption (OWA) prevent this kind of inference. You can look that up in a variety of places. And it is a common misconception about OWL inferences and consistency checking (please note that OWL includes some consistency checks, but is NOT a constraint checking language). You can, however use the CWA (Closed World Assumption) axioms in the profile. Just as you did with OWL 2 RL, go to the Ontology Profile tab and select "SPIN Constraints on OWL axioms with CWA". The cardinality checks are included in these rules. So is it true that those constraints (restrictions) will not be flagged a t all (only the explcitly defined ones)? In that case its clear.... Try the CWA rules. I think this has the semantics you are looking for. 3. currently I do: non-incremental/iteratily But....wrt 2. I guess it doesn't matter much what I say here...(?) (indeed when I specify incremental>no difference, still multiple values and no constraint violation warning... OK, now I'm able to infer what you are doing. Keep in mind that OWL is a monotonic logic. You can add facts, but you can't remove them. So if you run inferences, change a value, then run inferences again, the result is two values. This is precisely how OWL is specified. If you need to modify data, then you have to look outside of OWL, as it cannot support removing old values. Facts cannot be removed. SPARQL is another W3C semantic web technology, and SPARQL Update supports delete and modify (delete/insert combo). Incremental inferencing is a specialized TBC-ME feature that supports re-inferencing after a value has changed. Basically it analyzes rules that specify the modified value, removes current inferences and re-runs the rules. Again, not an OWL feature. Ps Another thing I run into is that I get an error on save ("safe failed") after inferencing: the file seems readonly and I have to choose another name... I assume your data is in the TopBraid project. This project contains system models that are read-only, hence all files in that project are read-only. Create a new project (using New... Project) and add your data files in that project. -- Scott -----Original Message----- From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott Henninger Sent: woensdag 21 september 2011 17:52 To: TopBraid Suite Users Subject: [topbraid-users] Re: spin on rectangle Michel; In Composer, see see TopBraid/Examples/spinsquare.rdf. That should answer most of your questions. You don't see constraint violation warnings on multiple values because you haven't defined any that would detect multiple values. The Attribute ss:area : xsd:integer [,1]" in spinsquare.rdf will do this. Or you can define a constraint, such as: ASK WHERE { ?this :area ?area1 . ?this :area ?area2 . FILTER (?area1 != ?area2) . } I didn't see any instances in your model. When I do add an instance, give it width/length values, and modify the values, I do not see multiple values of area created by incremental inferencing. So to reproduce your scenario, you'll have to provide a step-by-step procedure. -- Scott On Sep 21, 10:32 am, "Bohms, H.M. (Michel)" <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote: Hi Scott, Michel; Let's start by establishing a context. I'll assume you are talking about spinsquare.rdf with SPIN incremental inferencing turned on. ehhhh, I don't think so, what is spinsquare.rdf? I just have a class Square in my own ontology, now called rules.ttl as attached. What version and edition of TBC are you running? 3.5.2.v20110828-2200R When editing an area or height, I do not see multiple values for area on TBC-ME 3.5.2. So the values are over-ridden by new ones. when I reun inference I get multiple values (new values are added) so I thought I add card constraints..but this did nnot help.. The Attribute constraint defined in spin:Rectangle - "Attribute ss:area : xsd:integer [,1]" - will throw a constraint violation warning if there is more than one value for ss:area. Note that constraint violation warnings need to be turned on to run the constraint rules. I have that "On" just don't see the constraint flag wheb the are myultiple area values Thx Michel -- Scott On Sep 21, 7:39 am, "Bohms, H.M. (Michel)" <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote: a specific spin question: when I run inference on diff. width and length I get multiple values for area also when I define 3 cardinality=1 restrictions (for width, length and area) next when I check consistency I see no warnings, is that expected? isnt there a way to just override de earlier calculated value? thx Michel ps just a general question....as derivations can be seen as specific restriction wouldnt one want only 'restrictions'that are not only checked by also satisfied in some way? (instead of : construct area:= length*width >>>> ask/make area = length*width, in a symmetric way ...... or is this something for the future?? This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER athttp://www.tno.nl/emaildisclaimer -- 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]<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-users?hl=en rules.ttl 6KViewDownload rules.ttl.tbc 1KViewDownload -- 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]<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-users?hl=en -- 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 -- 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
