W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2001

RE: Domain/Range: conjuntion or disjuntion??

From: Peter Crowther <peter.crowther@networkinference.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 10:39:39 -0000
Message-ID: <B6F03FDBA149CA41B6E9EB8A329EB12D1ABC75@vault.melandra.net>
To: "'Arjohn Kampman'" <akam@aidministrator.nl>, tarod@softhome.net
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, jena-dev@yahoogroups.com
> From: Arjohn Kampman [mailto:akam@aidministrator.nl]
[...]
> One of the reason for changing RDF Schema on this issue is that using
> the conjunction view can lead to inconsistencies when combined with
> multiple inheritance. A small document that we wrote about this in
> April of this year can be found at:
> 
> http://sesame.aidministrator.nl/doc/rdf-interpretation.html
> 
> Chapter 4 is about the rdfs:domain and rdfs:range properties.
> 
> I hope this will convince you that disjuction is the way to go, even
> though it has some drawback from a modelers point-of-view.
[...]

Arjohn, having read the document, I assume you mean '...using the
DISJUNCTION view can lead to inconsistencies...' and '...convince you that
CONJUNCTION is the way to go...' above?

		- Peter
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2001 05:40:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:52 GMT