- From: Geoff Chappell <geoff@sover.net>
- Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:46:03 -0500
- To: "'Brian Manley'" <manleyr@telcordia.com>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
I wonder if you could get away with something like this:
rss:Channel rdfs:subClassOf
[ a owl:Restriction;
owl:onProperty rss:items;
owl:allValuesFrom
[rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Seq,
[a owl:Restriction;
owl:onProperty [a rdfs:ContainerMemershipProperty];
owl:allValuesFrom rss:item
]
]
].
The alternative would be pretty ugly:
rss:Channel rdfs:subClassOf
[ a owl:Restriction;
owl:onProperty rss:items;
owl:allValuesFrom owl:unionOf(
[rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Seq,
[a owl:Restriction;
owl:onProperty rdf:_1;
owl:allValuesFrom rss:item
]
[rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Seq,
[a owl:Restriction;
owl:onProperty rdf:_2;
owl:allValuesFrom rss:item
]
]
...
].
- Geoff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Brian Manley
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 11:25 AM
> To: semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: Constraining Collections?
>
>
> All,
>
> Can rdf:Collection and friends be constrained? In RSS 1.0 for example,
> rss:items is supposed to reference a rdf:Seq containing only references to
> resources of type rss:item. However, this seems to be by convention rather
> than being formally specified in the schema. Is there are a way to do this
> in RDFS or OWL?
>
> Many thanks!
> Brian
>
Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2005 16:46:25 UTC