[Pellet-users] Pellet doesn't respect non-simple roles in number restriction prohibition

[Bijan Parsia]

On Thursday, July 10, 2008 11:48am, "Evren Sirin" <evren at clarkparsia.com> said:

> Pellet detects the violation of such non-structural restrictions. The
> default behavior is to ignore the axiom that violates the DL restriction
> and print a logging message about this. There is also a strict
> processing mode [1] where Pellet rejects processing such ontologies.
> 
> It looks like Pellet integration to Protege 4 uses the relaxed mode but
> hides the warning messages about ignored axioms. It is unfortunate
> because in this example the transitivity of P would be ignored and you
> wouldn't get any inferences regarding transitivity but will not see a
> warning either. Pellet provides programmatic access to warning messages
> so it should be possible for P4 to display such warnings (or maybe it
> already has a reasoner-independent component that reports such violations?).

I thought it was odd. Thanks! (Grr. Should have used the command line! BAD BIJAN!!!! NO SCOFFING AT NOOB QUESTIONS FOR 25 DAYS!!!)

I'll report to the Protege4 people.

I'll check, but it's pretty clear we need a standard interface in the reasoner class (if there's not one) to toggle all these things, and a configuration panel in Prot4.

Cheers,
Bijan.