Submissions:Class by path attribute value
From Odp
(New page: {{Alignment_OP_Proposal_toolbar}} {{Graphical representation |ImageName=Class-by-path-attribute-value.png }} {{Alignment OP General Template |Name=Class by path attribute value |SubmittedB...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Alignment_OP_Proposal_toolbar}} | {{Alignment_OP_Proposal_toolbar}} | ||
| + | {{Graphical representation header}} | ||
{{Graphical representation | {{Graphical representation | ||
|ImageName=Class-by-path-attribute-value.png | |ImageName=Class-by-path-attribute-value.png | ||
| Line 14: | Line 15: | ||
|Solution=The two classes in two ontologies are provided along with a statement involving | |Solution=The two classes in two ontologies are provided along with a statement involving | ||
either one class or both classes. This statement is a precondition for the correspondence. This pattern is agnostic to whether the correspondence is unidirectional or bidirectional. However, if the correspondence is bidirectional (equivalence relation), the same precondition applies for both directions. | either one class or both classes. This statement is a precondition for the correspondence. This pattern is agnostic to whether the correspondence is unidirectional or bidirectional. However, if the correspondence is bidirectional (equivalence relation), the same precondition applies for both directions. | ||
| - | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Alignment OP Example Template | {{Alignment OP Example Template | ||
| - | |Solution= | + | |Solution=Example correspondence: |
| - | + | ||
| + | <Cell> | ||
<entity1> | <entity1> | ||
<Class> | <Class> | ||
| Line 66: | Line 67: | ||
{{Reviews about me}} | {{Reviews about me}} | ||
{{Modeling issues about me}} | {{Modeling issues about me}} | ||
| + | {{My references}} | ||
Revision as of 12:54, 3 March 2010
| 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: 8494 |
Graphical representation
Diagram
General information
| Name | Class by path attribute value |
|---|---|
| Also known as | |
| Author(s) | Francois Scharffe |
| SubmittedBy | FrancoisScharffe |
Description
| Domain (if applicable) | General |
|---|---|
| Alignment problem addressed | A class in one ontology is aligned to a class in another ontology and the criteria
for membership in the class are specified by an attribute value at the end of a path. |
| Alignment solution | The two classes in two ontologies are provided along with a statement involving
either one class or both classes. This statement is a precondition for the correspondence. This pattern is agnostic to whether the correspondence is unidirectional or bidirectional. However, if the correspondence is bidirectional (equivalence relation), the same precondition applies for both directions. |
| Alignment workflow | |
| Reusable component |
Example
| Problem example | |
|---|---|
| Solution example | Example correspondence:
<Cell> <entity1>
<Class>
<and>
<Class rdf:about="o1 :Person"/>
<AttributeValueCondition>
<onAttribute>
<Property>
<first>
<Relation rdf:about="o1 :workplace"/>
</first>
<next>
<Property>
<first>
<Relation rdf:about="o1 :address"/>
</first>
<next>
<Property rdf:about="o1 :city"/></next>
</next>
</Property>
</next>
</Property>
</onAttribute>
<comparator rdf:resource="xsd:not-equal"/>
<value>
<Property>
<first>
<Relation rdf:about="o1 :address"/>
</first>
<next>
<Property rdf:about="o1 :city"/>
</next>
</Property>
</value>
</AttributeValueCondition>
</and>
</Class>
</entity1>
<entity2>
<Class rdf:about="o2 :Commuter">
</entity2>
</Cell>
|
| Consequences |
Reference
| Origin | |
|---|---|
| Known use | |
| Reference | |
| Related to | |
| Test |
Scenarios
No scenario is added to this Content OP.
Reviews
There is no review about this proposal. This revision (revision ID 8494) takes in account the reviews: none
Other info at evaluation tab
Modeling issues
There is no Modeling issue related to this proposal.
References
