In connection with your inheritance examples below, you may like to run the examples called ClydeElephant1 and RDFreasoning1 at www.reengineeringllc.com.
We use those examples to argue (in our "Semantic Web Presentation") that it is dangerous to do inheritance reasoning without attaching English meanings to what you are doing.
We also show how to attach such meanings without the usual burdens of natural language dictionary- and grammar-maintenance.
Hope this helps. Best, -- Adrian
Dr. Adrian Walker
PO Box 1412
CT 06011-1412 USA
Phone: USA 860 583 9677
Cell: USA 860 830 2085
Fax: USA 860 314 1029
At 02:04 AM 12/3/03 +0800, you wrote:
I have some comments about rdfs:subPropertyOf:
1) if (R rdfs:subPropertyOf S)
(R rdfs:domain C1) (R rdf:range D1)
(S rdfs:domain C2) (S rdf:range D2)
can we infer that (C1 rdfs:subClassOf C2) && (D1 rdfs:subClassOf D2)?
I believe the result can be easily inferred by the RDF Model Theory, but there is no rule in the RDFS closure rules
to show this inference.
2) rdf schema allows one rdf:Property has multiple rdfs:domain and rdfs:range, and the resulted domain and range is
considered as intersection. But RDF schema specification didn t say much what about have zero rdfs:domain or rdfs:range,
this arise some confusion.
a) is zero rdfs:domain or rdfs:range declaration is legit in rdf schema?
b) If zero rdfs:domain declaration means that the property s domain is rdfs:Resource, there is a problem: if the property s superproperty
s domain is declared as Class C1, then we can conclude the propery s domain is a subclass of C1, but not rdfs:Resource.
c) What is the meaning of zero rdfs:range declaration?