- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:39:54 +0100
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Cc: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org>
At 14:13 25/10/2002 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> > >1:[[
> > >
> > >eg:prop rdfs:range eg:A .
> > >eg:A rdfs:subClassOf eg:B .
> > >
> > >entails
> > >
> > >eg:prop rdfs:range eg:B .
> > >]]
> >
>Brian:
> > Wierd!
Ah, thanks for this. I was wrong earlier. The intersection semantics
still apply. In my earlier example, I was thinking that given
IEXT(A) = {a}
IEXT(B) = {a, b}
then b became a legitimate value of prop. That is wrong, yes?
Is there a reason why we would care?
Is the course allowing max flexibility not to have it. If webont want it
they can add it. If we do it and they don't want it, they can't take it away.
Brian
Received on Friday, 25 October 2002 08:37:34 UTC