I have a question related to inverse object properties.
if we have inverse object properties such as has_part and is_part_of is it necessary to assign both to classes or can the reasoned infer the inverse if we only assign one of these e.g.
If we define only arm is_part_of body can protégé infer body has_part arm?
This inference is only safe on the individual level. If 'individual A' has_part 'arm B', then if part_of InverseOf has_part, it follows that 'arm B' part_of 'individual A'. But this is not the case on the class level where you need to use quantifiers (some/only) to relate classes
For example, it does not follow from "(all) head has_part some hair" that "(all) hair part_of some head".
An if so how do we get this information?
_______________________________________________ protege-user mailing list [hidden email] https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user