- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 14:43:01 +0100
- To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk, bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
[...] > > The answer is a simply B/W ***yes or no*** > > > Yes it does, and I support the test case. Sorry about my earlier hiccup. > > Can I suggest a minor change that in test0001.nt one of the domains > and one of the ranges should be assigned to the subproperty not the > superproperty. One could even add a third domain and range for the > subproperty. > > That's just to completely rule out any sort of non-monotonic defeasible > reasoning. I've followed your nice suggestion for test001 in that one of the domains and one of the ranges is now assigned to the subproperty It's updated in http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfs-subPropertyOf-semantics/ thanks Jeremy -- Jos
Received on Friday, 5 April 2002 08:51:18 UTC