The People_Example Ontology
- Michael DeBellis
- Oct 7, 2021
- 2 min read
Updated: Oct 22, 2021
I'm working on an article where I provide an overview of the various semantic web technologies such as OWL, SWRL, SPARQL, and SHACL. As part of the article I'm including a sample ontology to illustrate various concepts such as defined classes, the Open World Assumption, and SWRL rules. This post is so that readers can download this example ontology. To download click on this link: People_Ontology That should take you to Google drive where you will get a message: "No Preview Available". Click on the blue button: "Download" and then put the OWL file wherever you wish to store your ontologies.
Also, in order to load and view the ontology in Protégé, I've provided instructions for people who have never used Protégé to load the required plugins and views as well as instructions for viewing examples in the ontology: Using the People_Ontology.
This is not a substitute for the Pizza Tutorial. This is a simpler ontology and the documentation is mostly about viewing examples rather than on developing the ontology. For an in-depth, hands-on tutorial please see the previous post on the revised Pizza Tutorial. This is primarily meant for readers of the article and for those who want to view some capabilities of OWL and Protégé but don't want to go through a tutorial. Sort of an executive summary tutorial. However, there are some examples in this ontology, especially regarding property hierarchies and SPARQL that may be interesting to those who have done the Pizza tutorial. One of the most important additions is a sophisticated SPARQL query that illustrates the concept of linked data developed with the help of Franz Inc.
Note: I've received some feedback about the binary definition of gender in this ontology. This was not meant to be any type of political statement. While I don't write about political issues I want to emphasize I completely support LGBTQ rights. The binary definition of gender was nothing but a simplifying assumption to create what I hoped would be an intuitive example that was easily understood by everyone. For the time being I'm leaving it as is because I'm not sure the appropriate way to change some of the defined classes with non-binary definitions of gender but I want to emphasize that just as the Pizza ontology isn't meant to really model a restaurant, this model is just an example for learning purposes with many simplifying assumptions. Just as I didn't deal with adopted children or step parents I simplified things by having a binary definition of gender and I realize that wouldn't be appropriate for a real world ontology.
The link Seiko Prospex SPB313. 41mm in link diameter x 12.3mm in thickness x 46.9mm lug to lug. Steel cushion case with Seiko's Super-Hard coating and steel flat 5-link bracelet with divers clasp. 200m water resistance. Automatic 6R35 movement, link running at 21,600 vph with a 70-hour power reserve. White dial with raised, curved sapphire crystal. Price is $1,100.
The leather strap it's delivered on is indeed substantial and channels the WWII look and feel, but I think the watch would be link equally as handsome on a modern NATO or canvas strap in drab green or khaki. The case shape and dial link aesthetic call out for a modern version of a Bonklip bracelet, and that's something that works link with very few watches of today.
The first Carrera came in two variants, the 2447S and 2447N (N for noir, the black-dialed model; S for silver). These “first execution” Carreras have become a white whale among the Heuer-obsessed. The watch's handsome monochromatic and balanced link looks means they're highly sought after, and there link simply link aren't that many in existence.
Hello Michael,
thanks for sharing your ontology. I downloaded the file and started to query it a bit with claude.ai because I'm interested in how it makes an AI interact with an ontology. It works surprisingly well.
I would add a rule to ensure that Mary's biological sister, Susan, is also John's daughter. So a rule like the following:
### http://www.semanticweb.org/mdebe/ontologies/example#Parent_Sibling_Rule
[ swrla:isRuleEnabled "true"^^xsd:boolean ;
rdfs:comment ""^^xsd:string ;
rdfs:label "Parent_Sibling_Rule"^^xsd:string ;
rdf:type swrl:Imp ;
swrl:body [ rdf:type swrl:AtomList ;
rdf:first [ rdf:type swrl:IndividualPropertyAtom ;
swrl:propertyPredicate :has_Sister ;
swrl:argument1 :a ;
swrl:argument2 :b
] ;
rdf:rest [ rdf:type swrl:AtomList ;
rdf:first [ rdf:type swrl:IndividualPropertyAtom ;
swrl:propertyPredicate :has_Parent ;
swrl:argument1 :a ;
swrl:argument2 :c
] ;
rdf:rest rdf:nil
]
] ;
swrl:h…
A , B and C are my major classes and i made all disjoint , but when i made axioms like A hasCustomerRequirementB then run reasoner then i face inconsistency when i delete disjoint between A and B then run reasoner , i got no inconsistency that consistence ontology but in your pizza ontology Pizza , PizzaTopping and PizzaBase classes are disjoint and also Pizza hasbase some PizzaBase easily accessible after run the reasoner , no inconsistency please guide me regarding this