RE: MT RDFS closure rule bug?

On Wed, 2002-06-26 at 04:08, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
[...]
> Any interpretation of any 
> 
> > >aaa [rdfs:range] yyy
> > >yyy [rdfs:subClassOf] zzz
> 
> 
> is an interpretation of
> 
> > >aaa [rdfs:range] zzz

I don't think our specs say that.


> thus the closure rule holds.
> 
> (Not) Proof:
> 
> Ahh, it depends on rdfs:range not being in the domain of discourse.
> neglecting that little factette and invalidating the proof ...
> 
> Whenever 
> iii aaa jjj .
> then
> jjj [rdf:type] yyy .
> hence
> jjj [rdf:type] zzz .
> 
> hence
> 
> aaa [rdfs:range] zzz .
> 
> ==

Where does that last step come from? Which part of our
spec allows you to conclude the rdfs:range triple?


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/