DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! Thinking Clearly is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

  • Subscribe

  • Community

  • Top Commenters

  • Popular Threads

  • Recent Comments

    • Small update: the rate that housing in DC is going for Obama's upcoming inauguration, I think we can massively capitalize C&P by renting out the office for the week! I've seen rates...

      7 months ago by Kendall

      in Yes We Can? Yes We Did!

    • I appreciate how difficult that must have been for you, Jim, and I agree that "woohoo" is exactly how I felt too! :>

      7 months ago by Kendall

      in Yes We Can? Yes We Did!

    • Testing Disqus, again... Hopefully it works out this time.

      7 months ago by Kendall

      in Pellet 2.0 RC3

    • As much as I hate to agree with Kendall, I must say WOOOOHOOO!!!

      8 months ago by Jim Hendler

      in Yes We Can? Yes We Did!

    • It's utterly joyous and amazing. The bummer in the joy are the various anti-gay marriage initiatives, including the loathsome Prop 8 in California. I find it hard to believe and sad that people...

      8 months ago by Bijan Parsia

      in Yes We Can? Yes We Did!

Thinking Clearly

Semantics: OWL, RDF, etc.
Jump to original thread »
Author

Understanding SWRL (Part 2): DL Safety

Started by Kendall · 10 months ago

In the previous post, I gave a hint at the enormous power of (arbitrary) SWRL rules by showing how they can be used (directly and fairly easily) define various built in OWL constructs. SWRL faces the standard tradeoff for expressivity: loss of efficiency. SWRL is undecidable, that i ... Continue reading »

1 comment

  • Mike Smith

    1 year ago

    When using SWRL syntax, Pellet will throw up a lot of warnings: Just Ignore Them.

    The warnings are a result of species validation (which does not handle SWRL). Adding -s off to the command line will avoid the validation and eliminate the warning messages.
    reply
Please login to comment.
Returning? Login