Re: DAML+OIL Expressivity Question

From: Deborah McGuinness (dlm@ksl.stanford.edu)
Date: 11/08/01


sorry for the multiple emails.
In order to make this suggestion more operational, I have put up a web page at:
http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/daml/modelingIssues.html

If you provide html in that format, your input will be included more quickly.

d

Deborah McGuinness wrote:

> I am willing to collect such idioms.
> Please send me
> 1 - english of a statement you want to make
> 2 - a daml solution (if it is tricky, an english paraphrase first is useful).
>
> I have a start at such a collection since I wrote the "tricks of the trade" section
> of the "how and when to live with a kl-one-like language" [1] paper many moons ago.
> I generated that from working with users of classic and seeing how and when they
> were confused in their modeling tasks.
> That was for a mostly less expressive language than daml+oil (although interestingly
> enough would have happily been able to say the thing that jeff wanted to say since
> it did have same-as as a constructor).
>
> [1] http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/papers/living-with-classic-abstract.html
>
> d
>
> Pat Hayes wrote:
>
> > You know, guys, it is expecting rather a lot of the DPH to be able to
> > figure out that the right way to say that foo is baz, is to invent a
> > disjunctive superproperty and then restrict it to have a cardinality
> > of one. I'm sure this kind of thing makes life easier for the DL
> > reasoners, but it isn't likely to get DAML widely used.
> >
> > Would it make sense to provide some suite of idioms that could be
> > used to say a bunch of 'normal' things that people might want to say?
> > That might be a way towards making a useable interface to DAML, for
> > one thing.
> >
> > Pat
> >
> > >On November 7, Jeff Heflin writes:
> > >>  Ian,
> > >>
> > >>  Thanks for the ingenious suggestion. However, wouldn't you also have to
> > >>  express restrictions that the cardinality of bestFriend and spouse are
> > >>  1? Otherwise, people with a best friend but no spouse, or vice versa
> > >>  would be included in the class you defined.
> > >
> > >Oops - you are right of course.
> > >
> > >Ian
> > >
> > >>
> > >>  Jeff
> > >>
> > >>  Ian Horrocks wrote:
> > >>  >
> > >>  > On November 7, Jeff Heflin writes:
> > >>  > > Hi all,
> > >>  > >
> > >>  > > I recently had someone ask me if they could represent a particular kind
> > >>  > > of knowledge in DAML+OIL, and I wasn't able to give them a definite
> > >>  > > response. I was hoping one of our DL gurus could help. I was asked if it
> > >>  > > was possible to define the class of all people who's best friend is
> > >>  > > their spouse, where bestFriend and spouse are properties. I think this
> > >>  > > means they would need a restriction that could restrict two properties
> > >>  > > to have the same value. I don't believe we can do this in DAML+OIL, but
> > >>  > > wanted to check. Thanks!
> > >>  >
> > >>  > As you rightly suspect, there isn't a general way to restrict two
> > >>  > properties to have the same value. In cases like this, it may be
> > >>  > possible to use the property hierarchy to achieve the desired result
> > >>  > by declaring both bestFriend and spouse to be subProperties of a
> > >>  > property called, say, bestFriendORspouse, and then asserting the class
> > >>  > as equivalent to a maxCardinality restriction of 1 on
> > >>  > bestFriendORspouse.
> > >>  >
> > >>  > Ian
> > >>  >
> > >>  > >
> > >>  > > Jeff
> >
> > --
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > IHMC                                    (850)434 8903   home
> > 40 South Alcaniz St.                    (850)202 4416   office
> > Pensacola,  FL 32501                    (850)202 4440   fax
> > phayes@ai.uwf.edu
> > http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
>
> --
>  Deborah L. McGuinness
>  Knowledge Systems Laboratory
>  Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
>  Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
>  email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
>  URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm
>  (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705 0941

--
 Deborah L. McGuinness
 Knowledge Systems Laboratory
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
 URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705 0941


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST