Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Visually "filter" inferred axioms #26

Open
csnyulas opened this issue Mar 9, 2016 · 3 comments
Open

Visually "filter" inferred axioms #26

csnyulas opened this issue Mar 9, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@csnyulas
Copy link
Member

csnyulas commented Mar 9, 2016

In the "Inferred Axioms" tab of SWRLTab, show trivial axioms (such trivial declarations and equivalent classes axioms, subclassof axioms involving owl:Thing and owl:Nothing, etc) in grey, or otherwise de-emphasize them, so that the user can focus on the meaningful inferences.

As it can be seen in this screen shot most of the inferred axioms are uninteresting to the user:

screenshot swrltab inferred axioms

This is somewhat related to the current solution provided for #17.

@matthewhorridge
Copy link

Declarations shouldn't be inferred as they are non-logical axioms.

As a side note (and in relation with all the other issues to do with inferences), it's my understanding that once @martinjoconnor has rewritten the reasoner as a true Protege reasoner plugin, all of these issues will be irrelevant and presentation of inferred information in the Protege UI will come "for free" in the standard way.

@martinjoconnor
Copy link
Member

Yup. These are stopgap measure to make the current functionality usable.

@csnyulas
Copy link
Member Author

csnyulas commented Mar 9, 2016

I totally agree with both of you. However, the two list that I am referring at in this issue, are part of the SWRLTab plugin, and I think that de-emphasizing trivial inferences in these lists would definitely help users who would like to review the inferred axioms in order to find the interesting axioms that may be relevant for them.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants