headers
naveen malviya | 1 Apr 2011 07:26
Favicon

ontology

what is the example of data type property and how it is used for
education ontology

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
mhw | 1 Apr 2011 07:59
Picon
Favicon

Re: ontology

Dear Naveen,

Datatype properties are generally used to relate things to specific, typed data. Thus we can use them to
link to integers, dates, etc.

One advantage of this is that it flags up to a reasoner that it should handle the range as a datatype, not just
an individual. This then means we can define things like: the group of people aged under 18, or courses that
carry less than 30 credits.

Matt
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: "naveen malviya" <soet_100 <at> rediffmail.com>
Sender: protege-owl-bounces <at> lists.stanford.edu
Date: 1 Apr 2011 05:26:24 
To: <protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
Reply-To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor
	<protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
Subject: [protege-owl] ontology

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Nor Aza | 1 Apr 2011 09:37
Picon

protege.model

Hi.
I have just joined the group and have a very basic question to ask. I 
have been following a few examples (for v3.4.4 and v4.0.2) in the wiki 
incl tutorials and many have used this line "import 
edu.stanford.smi.protege.model". Where can I find 
"edu.stanford.smi.protege.model"?

thanks & kind regards,
aza
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
P.B.Chapman | 1 Apr 2011 10:43
Picon
Favicon

Abstraction in disjoint unions

Hello

I'm using Protégé 4.1, and the March 24 2011 version (edition 1.3) of
the Manchester tutorial.  I've also checked the Quick and Dirty Tutorial
for Pizzas on the wiki, and didn't find what I was looking for there.

I can specify that a class (for example animal) is a disjoint union of
the images of two disjoint relations for a specific individual, using

is_liked_by value Peter, is_disliked_by value Peter

So, every animal is either liked by Peter, or disliked by Peter.  I can
add further constraints for different individuals by hand.  However, I
want to quantify over individuals, so I really want to say

"For any individual a, animal is the disjoint union of is_liked_by a and
is_disliked_by a."

So, this would give me a set of constraints, which would be instantiated
for every individual (my set of individuals is finite).  Then, the first
constraint (about Peter) would be an instance of the second.

The following construct is incorrect, or rather, is inadequate for my
purposes

is_liked_by some Thing, is_disliked_by some Thing

because the two quantified variables may be different.

Is it even possible to do this in Protégé?

Thanks!

Peter

___________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by MessageLabs' Email Security
System on behalf of the University of Brighton.
For more information see http://www.brighton.ac.uk/is/spam/
___________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Thomas Schneider | 1 Apr 2011 12:35
Picon
Picon

Was: ontology Now: datatype properties

See also the chapter on datatype properties in the excellent Protégé OWL Tutorial: ;-)

http://owl.cs.manchester.ac.uk/tutorials/protegeowltutorial/

Cheers

Thomas

On 01.04.2011, at 07:59, mhw <at> doctors.org.uk wrote:

> Dear Naveen,
> 
> Datatype properties are generally used to relate things to specific, typed data. Thus we can use them to
link to integers, dates, etc.
> 
> One advantage of this is that it flags up to a reasoner that it should handle the range as a datatype, not just
an individual. This then means we can define things like: the group of people aged under 18, or courses that
carry less than 30 credits.
> 
> Matt
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "naveen malviya" <soet_100 <at> rediffmail.com>
> Sender: protege-owl-bounces <at> lists.stanford.edu
> Date: 1 Apr 2011 05:26:24 
> To: <protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
> Reply-To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor
> 	<protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [protege-owl] ontology
> 
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
> 
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
> 
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
> 
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Timothy Redmond | 1 Apr 2011 16:18
Picon
Favicon

Re: protege.model

On 04/01/2011 12:37 AM, Nor Aza wrote:
> Hi.
> I have just joined the group and have a very basic question to ask. I 
> have been following a few examples (for v3.4.4 and v4.0.2) in the wiki 
> incl tutorials and many have used this line "import 
> edu.stanford.smi.protege.model". Where can I find 
> "edu.stanford.smi.protege.model"?
>
> thanks & kind regards,
> aza
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: 
> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
mhw | 1 Apr 2011 16:41
Picon
Favicon

Re: Abstraction in disjoint unions

Dear Peter,

I'm not sure if I've understood the question properly, and I'm not sure if this answer is correct (I'm on a
train, so it's a little rough).

You can have a class "is liked by Peter" and another "is not liked by Peter" and then define a third class as
being the union of those; however, that causes problems with other people (e.g. liked by Matt). It is also
ontological nonsense - the class of animals is independent of whether they are liked by Peter or not.

Would a better solution be to have a functional property "has_emotion_about animal", whose range is
people and whose domain is animals, with two (functional) sub-properties likes and dislikes? Then for
any person p and animal a, likes(p, a) or dislikes(p,a) holds, but never both at the same time.

Again, I would need to check this with the docs and an example, but I don't have them to hand. If that doesn't
answer, please let me know which bit fails and we can try again.

HTH,
Matt
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: P.B.Chapman <at> brighton.ac.uk
Sender: protege-owl-bounces <at> lists.stanford.edu
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:43:16 
To: <protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
Reply-To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor
	<protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
Subject: [protege-owl] Abstraction in disjoint unions

Hello

I'm using Protégé 4.1, and the March 24 2011 version (edition 1.3) of
the Manchester tutorial.  I've also checked the Quick and Dirty Tutorial
for Pizzas on the wiki, and didn't find what I was looking for there.

I can specify that a class (for example animal) is a disjoint union of
the images of two disjoint relations for a specific individual, using

is_liked_by value Peter, is_disliked_by value Peter

So, every animal is either liked by Peter, or disliked by Peter.  I can
add further constraints for different individuals by hand.  However, I
want to quantify over individuals, so I really want to say

"For any individual a, animal is the disjoint union of is_liked_by a and
is_disliked_by a."

So, this would give me a set of constraints, which would be instantiated
for every individual (my set of individuals is finite).  Then, the first
constraint (about Peter) would be an instance of the second.

The following construct is incorrect, or rather, is inadequate for my
purposes

is_liked_by some Thing, is_disliked_by some Thing

because the two quantified variables may be different.

Is it even possible to do this in Protégé?

Thanks!

Peter

___________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by MessageLabs' Email Security
System on behalf of the University of Brighton.
For more information see http://www.brighton.ac.uk/is/spam/
___________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Timothy Redmond | 1 Apr 2011 16:43
Picon
Favicon

Re: protege.model


Apologies for my last empty message.  My mail program is having some sort of trouble and I didn't wait long enough.


On 04/01/2011 12:37 AM, Nor Aza wrote:
Hi.
I have just joined the group and have a very basic question to ask. I have been following a few examples (for v3.4.4 and v4.0.2) in the wiki incl tutorials and many have used this line "import edu.stanford.smi.protege.model".

I am guessing from the nature of the of the import (edu.stanford.smi.protege.model) that you are asking a java question and not an ontology question.  But I could be wrong - what wiki tutorials are you talking about?

As a Java question, the import statement is a useful abbreviation for naming things.  For example, in many programs involving the OWL api you will see the lines:

import org.semanticweb.owlapi.model.OWLOntologyManager; import org.semanticweb.owlapi.apibinding.OWLManager;

This allows one to make the statement

OWLOntologyManager manager = OWLManager.createOWLOntologyManager();

as opposed to the the more verbose and less readable

org.semanticweb.owlapi.model.OWLOntologyManager manager = org.semanticweb.owlapi.apibinding.OWLManager.createOWLOntologyManager();

Ontologies also have a notion of an import.  An import statement in an ontology is a directive to go to a certain location and load the contents of the ontology found at that location.  For instance the line
Import(<http://protege.stanford.edu/plugins/owl/dc/protege-dc.owl>)
tells the importing ontology to go to the address

http://protege.stanford.edu/plugins/owl/dc/protege-dc.ow
and download the statements found there and make them an imported part of the current ontology.  The reason that your example didn't look like an ontology import was that your import address (edu.stanford.smi.protege.model) did look like a java package but did not look like a URL for an ontology.

Where can I find "edu.stanford.smi.protege.model"?

This particular java package is found in the file protege.jar that comes with the standard Protege 3 distribution.  However your import statement appears to be missing something.  The java directive

import edu.stanford.smi.protege.model.*

would make sense - it would mean import all the names of java classes found in the edu.stanford.smi.protege.model package.  Also an import like

import edu.stanford.smi.protege.model.Cls;

would make sense.   It would indicate that you import the java class named Cls.

-Timothy




thanks & kind regards,
aza
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03 

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Matt Williams | 2 Apr 2011 10:15
Picon
Favicon

Re: Abstraction in disjoint unions

Dear Peter,

(cc'd to list)

Your example using number is perhaps purer, and I agree that if we 
consider the set of NN 1-100, then I think defining disjoint subsets of 
that makes complete sense.

However, I think this because there is something "intrinsic" to the 
numbers that allows us to do it, whereas there is nothing intrinsic to 
the animals that makes them liked or not. The set of animals liked by me 
or you would either be enumerated (i.e. just list your likes/ dislikes) 
or defined on the basis of some other property (e.g. I like all 4-legged 
mammals), in which case we should use legs/ mammals as the defining 
property.

I think the problem with arbitrary assignments to classes is that they 
involve a lot of manual work (and repeated work for each person)- 
however, that might not be a problem. I would also check that my 
solution does work - it might not, as I haven't had chance to check it. 
There may be a problem with the functional properties, so if it matters 
I would check it with a toy example before going ahead.

HTH,

Matt

On 02/04/2011 08:33, P.B.Chapman <at> brighton.ac.uk wrote:
> Hi Matt
>
> Thanks for that.  I think I was misinterpreting what the disjoint union did.  I thought that a set/class was
defined, and then the disjoint union just gave us some additional facts about it.  For instance, the
natural numbers between 1 and 100 could be defined, and then one could partition this set in many ways (I've
added the labels to make clear that this is not one big disjoint union, but rather three different
partitions which all hold at the same time):
>
> a. divisible_by 2, not_divisible_by 2
> b. divisible_by 3, not_divisible_by 3
> c. divisible_by 4, not_divisible_by 4
>
> and so on.  So, each constraint individually partitions the set of N between 1 and 100, but does not affect
the others.  For example, a number being divisible_by 2 gives no information as to whether a number is
divisible_by 10.
>
> In my example, suppose there was a cat, a dog, an elephant and a monkey (and only those) in my set of animals,
then my likes and dislikes were anonymous classes (the image of is_liked_by value Peter etc) which could
partition the set as [cat, elephant],[dog, monkey], whereas your likes and dislikes could partition the
set as [elephant],[cat,dog,monkey].  They would both by independent facts about the class of animals: me
liking a cat does not stop you from liking or disliking cats.
>
> Is that interpretation incorrect?
>
> However, the method you suggested seems to do exactly what I require anyway (although I've not tried it
yet, but I can see it should work), so it's a moot point whether or not the other way was feasible.
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter
> ________________________________________
> From: mhw <at> doctors.org.uk [mhw <at> doctors.org.uk]
> Sent: 01 April 2011 15:41
> To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor; Chapman Peter
> Subject: Re: [protege-owl] Abstraction in disjoint unions
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> I'm not sure if I've understood the question properly, and I'm not sure if this answer is correct (I'm on a
train, so it's a little rough).
>
> You can have a class "is liked by Peter" and another "is not liked by Peter" and then define a third class as
being the union of those; however, that causes problems with other people (e.g. liked by Matt). It is also
ontological nonsense - the class of animals is independent of whether they are liked by Peter or not.
>
> Would a better solution be to have a functional property "has_emotion_about animal", whose range is
people and whose domain is animals, with two (functional) sub-properties likes and dislikes? Then for
any person p and animal a, likes(p, a) or dislikes(p,a) holds, but never both at the same time.
>
> Again, I would need to check this with the docs and an example, but I don't have them to hand. If that doesn't
answer, please let me know which bit fails and we can try again.
>
> HTH,
> Matt
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: P.B.Chapman <at> brighton.ac.uk
> Sender: protege-owl-bounces <at> lists.stanford.edu
> Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:43:16
> To:<protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
> Reply-To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor
>          <protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu>
> Subject: [protege-owl] Abstraction in disjoint unions
>
> Hello
>
> I'm using Protégé 4.1, and the March 24 2011 version (edition 1.3) of
> the Manchester tutorial.  I've also checked the Quick and Dirty Tutorial
> for Pizzas on the wiki, and didn't find what I was looking for there.
>
> I can specify that a class (for example animal) is a disjoint union of
> the images of two disjoint relations for a specific individual, using
>
> is_liked_by value Peter, is_disliked_by value Peter
>
> So, every animal is either liked by Peter, or disliked by Peter.  I can
> add further constraints for different individuals by hand.  However, I
> want to quantify over individuals, so I really want to say
>
> "For any individual a, animal is the disjoint union of is_liked_by a and
> is_disliked_by a."
>
> So, this would give me a set of constraints, which would be instantiated
> for every individual (my set of individuals is finite).  Then, the first
> constraint (about Peter) would be an instance of the second.
>
> The following construct is incorrect, or rather, is inadequate for my
> purposes
>
> is_liked_by some Thing, is_disliked_by some Thing
>
> because the two quantified variables may be different.
>
> Is it even possible to do this in Protégé?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Peter
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by MessageLabs' Email Security
> System on behalf of the University of Brighton.
> For more information see http://www.brighton.ac.uk/is/spam/
> ___________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by MessageLabs' Email Security
> System on behalf of the University of Brighton.
> For more information see http://www.brighton.ac.uk/is/spam/
> ___________________________________________________________
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by MessageLabs' Email Security
> System on behalf of the University of Brighton.
> For more information see http://www.brighton.ac.uk/is/spam/
> ___________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
shreyes shiv | 2 Apr 2011 22:11
Picon

ontology based application online

Please send the links of a few web sites or applications which is built on ontology.


--
shreyes shiv
email: shivshreyes <at> gmail.com
phone: 9557975780
IIRS(Indian Institute of Remote Sensing)
No. 4, Kalidas Road, Dehradun-248001, Uttarakhand, India
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
protege-owl <at> lists.stanford.edu
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |

Gmane