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@82.195.128.192>
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
<http://www.hackcraft.net/>
"…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 GMT

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