Hi Scott, Just a question to get some opinions.
I really like SPIN/SPARQL approach for modelling derivations and constraints.
It is a very nice way to model product requirements: model a product in one
ontology. Make a "requirements ontology" importing the first and add demands
and wishes in the form of rules...to limit the solution space...obtaining a
very good basis for configuration/optimization: add some goals (incl.
minimize/maximize, fitness function etc.) and finally derive the best end-user
specific solution instance ...
However, despite the existing abstraction from the actual SPIN meta-data as
plain SPARQL in the interface, I think it would be very nice to have even more
syntactic sugar on top of it.
Or in other words:
seeing:
ASK WHERE {
?this rules:length ?length .
FILTER (?length < 10) .
}
is way better than:
spin:constraint
[ a sp:Ask ;
sp:where ([ sp:object _:b1 ;
sp:predicate rules:length ;
sp:subject spin:_this
] [ a sp:Filter ;
sp:expression
[ a sp:lt ;
sp:arg1 _:b1 ;
sp:arg2 10
]])] ;
but just
length >= 10 in the context of a certain class would be even (much) nicer....
(esp. when there are many constraints/derivations)
thx for feedback, Michel
Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms
Sr. Research Scientist
Technical Sciences T +31 888663107
M +31 630381220
E [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Location<http://www.tno.nl/locaties/dtm>
Disclaimer<http://www.tno.nl/emaildisclaimer>
[cid:821092509@26092011-1D51]<http://www.tno.nl/>
--
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
<<inline: logo_signature.gif>>
