Re: less-restrictive range and domain terms

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
|>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'.
|
| Hmm.
|
| First of all, there is no 'property *must* have range of class foo' in RDF
| or OWL.  All there is is ``property *has* range class foo''.
|
| Second, what do you mean by 'property *may* have range of class foo'?

"There exist triples with property P and an object of class foo," rather
than "All triples with property P have objects of class foo," is a
useful interpretation, I presume.

| So, show us the inferences!

~    flabber x:schnack ghasted
~    ghasted rdf:type y:Ghostly

=====>

~    x:schnack phil:rangeIncludes y:Ghostly

- - Benja
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAl8qpUvR5J6wSKPMRAggQAKCDAvHKf067wsyI6cTJPwRtQZ2cXwCguFqi
TwYKOM2mkUkTxB6neP5FGIc=
=zfaY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----