Chris, Dan, Jos I confess to agreeing with Chris: I find this example confusing. I am missing something. Basicly I didn't understand: db:KeyProperty rdfs:subClassOf owl:FunctionalProperty. First I thought, huh, is this how we say something is a functional property? I would have thought db:KeyProperty rdfs:subPropertyOf owl:FunctionalProperty. Since nothing in any of the formalizations of RDF or OWL that I have seen seems to relate class inclusion to property inclusion. > I want FunctionalProperty to be usable like any other RDFS Class. So, now maybe I understand the example better. The example illustrates something that Dan wants. A defined relationship between classes and properties, such that if A rdfs:subClassOf B B rdf:type rdfs:Property then whatever property-related restrictions or definitions apply to B, they are inherited, VIA THE SUBCLASSOF RELATION, by A. ??? E.g. A rdfs:subClassOf B B rdf:type rdfs:Property -> A rdfs:subPropertyOf B Is this the point? As a technical note, I don't understand how Jos's example can work, since the default namespaces for the hypothesis and conclusion are different in the two files referenced. And therefore the fred#customer references in the two files are to different resources. Did I miss something? - MikeReceived on Friday, 9 August 2002 16:25:32 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:51 GMT