[Pellet-Users] SWRL support in Pellet

[dhavalkumar thakker]

(Somehow I havent recieved this in my own email box hence reposting.
Apologies for multiple copies.)
----

Hi Vlad,
 
Thanks a lot for your answer.

Can you please point to some starting point (what needs to be done for
achieving support for buit-ins in the existing software) for those of us
who are interested in extending some functionality?
 
Thanks again for your comments..
 
Dhavalkumar
 
 
 
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:34:55 -0400, "Kolovski, Vladimir"
> <kolovski at cs.umd.edu> said:
> > Hi Dhavalkumar,
> >  Yep, there's no support for SWRL built-ins in the OWL API parser. Both
> >  OWL API and Pellet are open source though -- so one work around is to
> >  actually sit down and implement it.  Currently I'm wrapped up with other
> >  things so I can't do it, but  feel free to take a stab at it yourself.
> >  Another possible work-around is to try to express your rules using
> >  OWL-DL and user defined datatypes.
> > 
> > Vlad
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dhavalkumar thakker [mailto:dhavalkumar at xsmail.com]
> > Sent: Mon 10/23/2006 12:00 PM
> > To: pelletusers
> > Cc: Kolovski, Vladimir; Luke.Steller at infotech.monash.edu.au
> > Subject: re: [Pellet-Users] SWRL support in Pellet
> >  
> > Hi 
> > 
> > Please see the message inline...
> > 
> > >Hi,
> > 
> > >I've just added support for datatype properties in DL-safe rules in Pellet. There are some limitations though:
> > > - RETE engine won't work with them (RETE code is bypassed right now)
> > 
> > > - Variables in rules can only be bound to named individuals, not to data values.
> > 
> > Does it mean that the rules like following:
> > 
> > Person(?x)  /\  hasAge(?x, ?y)  /\  swrlb:greaterThan(?y, 18)  ? 
> > AdultPerson(?x)
> > 
> > is still not possible to define(reason) using Pellet? As the variables
> > are bound to values here. Are there any workarounds? As most of the
> > buitins will involve variables with data vales... 
> > Please correct me if I have incorrect assumptions..
> > 
> > Another question is, the Parser ignores the rules defined with the SWRL
> > built-ins entirely( i.e, if I am trying to find number of rules in a
> > file, it doesnt read them)
> > 
> > Any comments will be most welcome.
> > 
> > Many Thanks
> > 
> > Dhavalkumar
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > - It's not very well tested.
> > >
> > > If you have some examples rules, I can use them to test it out more.
> > 
> > >So, all in all, we support SWRL object property atoms, datatype property atoms, class atoms and individual (in)equality >atoms right now.
> > 
> > >Cheers,
> > >Vlad
> > 
> > -- 
> > http://www.fastmail.fm - Access all of your messages and folders
> >                           wherever you are
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.fastmail.fm - And now for something completely different

> 
-- 
Dhavalkumar Thakker
Phd candidate,
Semantic Web Services Research Group,
Nottingham Trent University, England
http://clarinet.doc.ntu.ac.uk:2000/dysec/dthakker.html

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service.