From 8af52541d00dc576bac20f9366be979a94d542c1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Federico Igne Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 15:13:18 +0000 Subject: Change how inverse roles are handle on the logic programming side Seems like an easy way to convert inverse roles into atoms is to write `R(y,x)` instead of `R^-(x,y)`. This is still something we need to test and some additional rules that use inverse roles in the naive way are still generated. --- src/main/scala/uk/ac/ox/cs/rsacomb/converter/RDFoxConverter.scala | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'src/main/scala/uk/ac/ox/cs') diff --git a/src/main/scala/uk/ac/ox/cs/rsacomb/converter/RDFoxConverter.scala b/src/main/scala/uk/ac/ox/cs/rsacomb/converter/RDFoxConverter.scala index 6193296..b4f5adb 100644 --- a/src/main/scala/uk/ac/ox/cs/rsacomb/converter/RDFoxConverter.scala +++ b/src/main/scala/uk/ac/ox/cs/rsacomb/converter/RDFoxConverter.scala @@ -425,7 +425,8 @@ trait RDFoxConverter { * @see [[https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Inverse_Object_Properties Inverse Object Properties]] */ case e: OWLObjectInverseOf => - convert(e.getInverse, term1, term2, suffix + Inverse) + //convert(e.getInverse, term1, term2, suffix + Inverse) + convert(e.getInverse, term2, term1, suffix) /** The infamous impossible case. * -- cgit v1.2.3