On 09/03/17 12:44, kumar rohit wrote:
I am sorry if it still appears unclear. The rule seems ok as I have
discussed it with another person but why the error comes, dont know.
There are other generic rules which works fine but when I include this
rule, it gives error.
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 3:35 PM, kumar rohit <kumar.en...@gmail.com> wrote:
*This is print out of string.*
*(?x http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#MasterStudent
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#MasterStudent>) (
http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#MasterStudent
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#MasterStudent>)
http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf
<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf>
http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student> ) -> (?x
http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student> )] *
Seriously?
After all the comments about readability and about built-in prefixes?
Andy
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Lorenz B. <buehm...@informatik.uni-
leipzig.de> wrote:
No no no. Print the String of the rule to the command line and show this
one to us.
The current one isn't readable and can't be parsed for sure. And how
should #MasterStudent be resolved?
And don't us such an old version of Jena! Version 3.2.0 is already
available.
The rule error is
Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0"
com.hp.hpl.jena.reasoner.rulesys.Rule$ParserException: Triple with 1
nodes!
The rule is
[rule1:(?x http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type
#MasterStudent) "
+ "(#MasterStudent http://www.w3.org/2000/01/
rdf-schema#subClassOf
#Student )"
+ " -> (?x http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type
#Student )]";
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Lorenz B. <
buehm...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
That doesn't solve your original problem, please provide the error!
RDFS reasoning is enough to cover that kind if inference, please read
the documentation (as usual) [1]
[1] https://jena.apache.org/documentation/inference/
Thanks a lot Dave, Lorenz, so it means I dont have to write these
rules
and
it will be inferred automatically? How it will be executed,? I have
default
model with no parameters and then the inferred model.
Should I pass the "OntModelSpec.OWL_MEM_MICRO_RULE_INF " to the
default
model?
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Lorenz B. <
buehm...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
1. That rule is unreadable again - at least for me. See how it is
shown
to the mailing list: http://jena.markmail.org/threa
d/akjkia6mysqhsq2i
2. Don't show the Java concatenated string but the rule as it's
printed
to the command line/console. Especially hereby one can see trivial
syntax errors
3. As Dave said, it's totally unclear why you're always omitting
obvious
details - what kind of exception?
4. The rule doesn't make sense, since the second term of the premise
doesn't contain any variable. It's not clear what you want to achieve
here.
(?x rdf:type :MasterStudent ) (:MasterStudent rdfs:subClassOf
:Student )
-> (?x rdf:type :Student )
That rule would be covered by the rdf:type/rdfs:subClassOf rule in
RDFS:
(?x rdf:type ?C) (?C rdfs:subClassOf ?D) -> (?x rdf:type ?D)
But in your rule the second term doesn't contribute to the reasoning
process. The result would be the same with
(?x rdf:type :MasterStudent ) -> (?x rdf:type :Student )
On 08/03/17 13:29, kumar rohit wrote:
Is there any problem in this rule. I am getting error here.
What error?
It is much easier for us to help if you say explicitly what went
wrong!
I used jena
generic rule reasoner so is it sufficient also for executing rdfs
sub
class
rules?
*[rule1:(?x http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#MasterStudent
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#MasterStudent>) "*
* + "( http://www.semanticweb.org/t/o
ntologies#MasterStudent
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#MasterStudent>)
http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf
<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf>
http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student> )"*
* + " -> (?x http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-
rdf-syntax-ns#type
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student
<http://www.semanticweb.org/t/ontologies#Student> )]"*
Almost impossible to read but at a glance it looks OK.
1. Please post messages as plain text. Your emailer has done horrid
things to the URIs.
2. The rule would be much easier to read if you use prefixes instead
of writing out the URIs longhand.
3. It's also possible to use the standard generic RDFS rules. You
don't have to write out your own special case rules for each
subClassOf relationship.
Dave
--
Lorenz Bühmann
AKSW group, University of Leipzig
Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center
--
Lorenz Bühmann
AKSW group, University of Leipzig
Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center
--
Lorenz Bühmann
AKSW group, University of Leipzig
Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center
