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

Re: Ways to restrict the properties a class may have?

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:40:43 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20041029103514.0226cf20@127.0.0.1>
To: algermissen@acm.org, "www-rdf-interest@w3.org" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

It seems to me that using an inference engine of some kind, all that needs 
to be added is some resource that represents a violation.  Then inference 
rules might be used to infer the presence of such in some given 
RDF.  (Maybe that's what Pychinko's Report(), mentioned by Kendall Clark, 
is meant to achieve?)

I don't think it's in the spirit of RDF to close off the properties that 
can be applied to a resource... it seems like saying that one knows all 
there is to be known about some object.  Unrecognized properties can 
(should) be ignored.

#g
--

At 21:35 28/10/04 +0200, Jan Algermissen wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I know about the various ways to constrain individual properties, but
>I seem to be unable to find out if there is a standard way of restricting
>the set of properties instances of a given class may 'have'.
>(Like relational tables form classes by grouping attributes)
>
>Is there an RDF vocabulary for this purpose?
>
>Hmm....what about owl:minCardinality (and owl:maxCardinality)? Does
>a missing cardinality of a property for a class imply the cardinality of zero?
>Or would relying on that be too application specific?
>
>Thanks for any help on this.
>
>Jan
>
>
>--
>Jan Algermissen
>Consultant & Programmer
>http://www.jalgermissen.com

------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Friday, 29 October 2004 15:54:19 GMT

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