Define OWL using OWL?

[Jian Huang]

Hello All,

A regular OWL statement is like:

:subject :predicate :object

Now I need to create something like:

:s :hasSubject :subject
:s :hasPredicate :predicate (*)
:s :hasObject :object

And hope that some tool such as Jena or Protege will understand it. Is is feasible? Specifically, is (*) valid?

Thanks,

Jason

[Jie Bao]

On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Jian Huang <jian.hu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> A regular OWL statement is like:
>
> :subject :predicate :object
>

to be more precise, it is an RDF statement.

> Now I need to create something like:
>
> :s :hasSubject :subject
> :s :hasPredicate :predicate (*)
> :s :hasObject :object
>

In OWL 2, you can reify an axiom for annotation purposes:

_:s rdf:type owl:Axiom.
_:s owl:annotatedSource :subject
_:s owl:annotatedProperty :predicate
_:s owl:annotatedTarget :object

For reification in the generic form, you have to use RDF reification

_:s rdf:type rdf:Statement.
_:s rdf:subject :subject
_:s rdf:predicate :predicate
_:s rdf:object :object

But this is a purely RDF treatment, not OWL

> And hope that some tool such as Jena or Protege will understand it. Is is

They should understand RDF reification, as it's a semantic construct.

The OWL "reification" vocabulary is for annotation only, thus can not
replace the original triple.

> feasible? Specifically, is (*) valid?

Yes

Jie

>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> >
>