- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:28:44 -0500
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Stian, I'm up and running with your checker. I've started listing the kinds of naughty restrictions. In particular, not being able to state the following hurts http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#Breaks_RL:_one_startedAt -Tim On Mar 5, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Timothy Lebo wrote: > Thanks, Stain. I look forward to trying this out. > > I added your notes at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#RL_compliance so that we can develop them further. > > Regards, > Tim > > On Mar 5, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > >> Right, I've now added my little JAR, which you can invoke just calling >> 'make' in the ontology/ folder: >> >> : stain@ralph ~/src/provenance-wg/prov/ontology; make >> java -jar bin/profilechecker.jar ProvenanceOntology.owl OWL2RLProfile >> >> >> If everything is fine, there is no further output. >> >> However, if I add that Element is a subclass of (Activity or Entity) I get: >> >> : stain@ralph ~/src/provenance-wg/prov/ontology; make >> java -jar bin/profilechecker.jar ProvenanceOntology.owl OWL2RLProfile >> Use of non-superclass expression in position that requires a >> superclass expression: >> ObjectUnionOf(<http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Activity> >> <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Entity>) >> [SubClassOf(<http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Element> >> ObjectUnionOf(<http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Activity> >> <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/Entity>)) in >> <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/>] >> make: *** [test] Error 1 >> >> >> See https://github.com/stain/profilechecker for source code of the JAR >> - it is based on OWL API 3.2.4, and can also check against other (or >> all) profiles. >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 13:56, Stian Soiland-Reyes >> <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 18:40, Jim McCusker <mccusj@rpi.edu> wrote: >>>> None of these require OWL-Full, and are well within DL. I haven't had >>>> trouble reasoning over these sorts of restrictions with data in place. >>> >>> Well, we can keep it in DL if that still does the job, I just meant >>> that there would be no OWL profile restrictions on forming those >>> rules, and that it should be possible to 'retrofit' them like that. >>> >>> -- >>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team >>> School of Computer Science >>> The University of Manchester >> >> >> >> -- >> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team >> School of Computer Science >> The University of Manchester >> >> > > >
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 20:29:21 UTC