W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2004

Re: Cases in the new specification of RDF Schema

From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:42:38 +0100
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040611094238.GD13355@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:27:36 +0200, Kianoush Eshaghi wrote:
> 1. A Class would own multiple superclasses. It would like such as
> following.
> 
> <rdfs:Class rdf:about="A">
> 	<rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#B"/>
> 	<rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#C"/>
> </rdfs:Class>

You have always been able to do this AFAIK.
 
> 2. A Property would own multiple domains and rangs. It would like such
> as following:
> 
> <rdf:Property rdf:about="a">
> 	<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#A"/>
> 	<rdfs:range    rdf:resource="#B"/>
> 	<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#C"/>
> 	<rdfs:range    rdf:resource="#D"/>
> 	...
> 	...
> </rdf:Property>

And this, but it probably doesnt mean what you think it does. It would
make anything that was in the domain of 'a' a member of #A and #C.
 
> 3. I define some relationships between resources via rdfs:Property.
> 
> I like to know, wether RDF Schema should accept transitive closure, what
> there is in mathematics such as  X ~ Y AND Y~Z  ----> X ~Z (transitive).
> (if RDF accepts multiple domains and rangs) For example:

No, you need to go to OWL for that.

- Steve
Received on Friday, 11 June 2004 05:42:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:07 GMT