Submissions:OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL)
From Odp
(Difference between revisions)
m (Article is waiting for review.) |
|||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
|SubmittedBy=Catherine Roussey, Oscar Corcho | |SubmittedBy=Catherine Roussey, Oscar Corcho | ||
}} | }} | ||
- | {{Logical OP Description Template}} | + | {{Logical OP Description Template |
+ | |Motivation= | ||
+ | We have identified a set of patterns that are commonly used by domain experts in their DL formalisations and OWL implementations, and that normally result in unsatisfiable classes or modelling errors. As aforementioned all these antipatterns come from a misuse and misunderstanding of DL expressions by ontology developers. Thus they are all Logical AntiPatterns (LAP): they are independent from a specific domain of interest, but dependent on the expressivity of the logical formalism used for the representation. We have categorized them into three groups: | ||
+ | |Aim=The ontology developer created a universal restriction to say that C1 instances can only be linked with property R to C2 instances. Next, a new universal restriction is added saying that C1 instances can only be linked with R to C3 instances, with C2 and C3 disjoint. In general, this is because the ontology developer forgot the previous axiom in the same class or in the parent class. | ||
+ | |Solution=C1 subClassOf R only C2; C1 subClassOf R only C3; C2 disjointWith C3 | ||
+ | If it makes sense, we propose to the domain expert to transform the two universal restrictions into only one that refers to the disjunction of C2 and C3. | ||
+ | C1 subClassOf R only (C2 or C3); C2 disjointWith C3 | ||
+ | }} | ||
{{Logical OP Example Template}} | {{Logical OP Example Template}} | ||
{{Logical OP Reference Template}} | {{Logical OP Reference Template}} | ||
- | + | [[Category:Waiting for review]] | |
{{Scenarios about me}} | {{Scenarios about me}} | ||
{{Reviews about me}} | {{Reviews about me}} | ||
- |
Revision as of 15:43, 31 July 2009
If you are a member of quality committee please visit the
If you are author of this proposal or you want to contribute to this pattern's review, you can: specify if this revision takes in account any of the review(s) In general, it could be useful to visit the evaluation section to have information about the evaluation process of this proposal Current revision ID: 5342 |
General information
Name | OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL) |
---|---|
Also known as | |
Author(s) | |
SubmittedBy | Catherine Roussey, Oscar Corcho |
Description
Motivation | We have identified a set of patterns that are commonly used by domain experts in their DL formalisations and OWL implementations, and that normally result in unsatisfiable classes or modelling errors. As aforementioned all these antipatterns come from a misuse and misunderstanding of DL expressions by ontology developers. Thus they are all Logical AntiPatterns (LAP): they are independent from a specific domain of interest, but dependent on the expressivity of the logical formalism used for the representation. We have categorized them into three groups: |
---|---|
Aim | The ontology developer created a universal restriction to say that C1 instances can only be linked with property R to C2 instances. Next, a new universal restriction is added saying that C1 instances can only be linked with R to C3 instances, with C2 and C3 disjoint. In general, this is because the ontology developer forgot the previous axiom in the same class or in the parent class. |
Solution description | C1 subClassOf R only C2; C1 subClassOf R only C3; C2 disjointWith C3
If it makes sense, we propose to the domain expert to transform the two universal restrictions into only one that refers to the disjunction of C2 and C3. C1 subClassOf R only (C2 or C3); C2 disjointWith C3 |
Elements | |
Implementation | |
Reusable component | |
Component type |
Example
Problem example | |
---|---|
Pattern solution example | |
Consequences |
Pattern reference
Origin | |
---|---|
Known use | |
Reference | |
Related ODP | |
Used in combination with | |
Test |
Scenarios
Scenarios about OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL)
No scenario is added to this Content OP.
Reviews
Reviews about OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL)
Review article | Posted on | About revision (current is 5342) |
---|---|---|
LuigiIannone about OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL) | 24550761 September 2009 | 56215,621 |
AlessandroAdamou about OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL) | 245508510 September 2009 | 57775,777 |
StefanoDavid about OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL) | 245508510 September 2009 | 57875,787 |
RinkeHoekstra about OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL) | 245512924 October 2009 | 57875,787 |
This revision (revision ID 5342) takes in account the reviews: none
Other info at evaluation tab