enum definition question

[Bohms, H.M. (Michel)]

When I use owl:one (classlevel for enumeration types) do I still need to do the rdf:type’s for the items or are those implicit/asserted?

 

(In case of open lists I have to but I now also do it for closed lists assuming, maybe wrongly,  that that one of is only the constraint)

 

 

 

Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms Senior Data Scientist T +31888663107 M +31630381220 E michel...@tno.nl Location   This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.

 

 

[dprice]

Best to always store the rdf:type statements.  For example, if someone SPARQLs over the data it’s very likely they would check the rdf:type of an instance value and would miss things. FWIW Composer’s create enumerated class wizard adds the rdf:type.

Cheers,

David

On 5 Aug 2019, at 15:17, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users <topbrai...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

When I use owl:one (classlevel for enumeration types) do I still need to do the rdf:type’s for the items or are those implicit/asserted?

 

(In case of open lists I have to but I now also do it for closed lists assuming, maybe wrongly,  that that one of is only the constraint)

 

 

 

Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms Senior Data Scientist T +31888663107 M +31630381220 E michel...@tno.nl Location

<image001.gif>

This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.

 

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to topbraid-user...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/6904027a037c4a09bedf82d91ba8db1e%40tno.nl.

UK +44 (0) 7788 561308

US +1 (336) 283-0808‬

[Irene Polikoff]

Please see below

On Aug 5, 2019, at 10:17 AM, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users <topbrai...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

When I use owl:one (classlevel for enumeration types) do I still need to do the rdf:type’s for the items or are those implicit/asserted?

Nothing is automatically asserted.

We always recommend giving a resource a type.

If you run inferences, rdf:type could also be inferred from owl:oneOf constraint, but this requires running inferencing.

 

(In case of open lists I have to but I now also do it for closed lists assuming, maybe wrongly,  that that one of is only the constraint)

Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms Senior Data Scientist T +31888663107 M +31630381220 E michel...@tno.nl Location

<image001.gif>

This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.