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

Re: less-restrictive range and domain terms

From: Jon Hanna <jon@hackcraft.net>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 17:04:46 +0100
Message-ID: <1083686686.4097bf1ed7578@>
To: "www-rdf-interest@w3.org" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

Quoting Phil Dawes <pdawes@users.sourceforge.net>:

> Hi All,
> I've recently found myself wanting a less-restrictive version of
> rdfs:range (or owl:allValuesFrom) and rdfs:domain. I want to say
> 'property *can* have range of class foo' rather than 'property *must*
> have range of class foo'.

The property then has a range which is a superclass of class foo.

> I first came across this requirement with my veudas RDF browser when
> consuming RDF without schema information. Hints like 'can have range'
> help when rendering the editing UI. They can also be inferred easily
> from the RDF.
> The second example was attempting to implement a cross-store querying
> mechanism - I want to make statements like 'in the context of store A,
> property canHaveRange class' This works as a useful hint for the query
> chopper-upper to decide which patterns to run against which stores.

Not so sure of this bit though.

Jon Hanna
"…it has been truly said that hackers have even more words for
equipment failures than Yiddish has for obnoxious people." - jargon.txt
Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2004 12:06:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:51 UTC