Re: Domain/range axioms redundancy

On 29 January 2017 at 13:34, Leila Bayoudhi <bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
> Please I wonder to know if it is correct to say "that domains and ranges
> could not be redefined for sub-properties?

They certainly can - all properties are subproperties of the top
(object or data) property.


> This is because sub-propoerties
> inherit their domains and ranges from superproprties?


Yes but this does not stop adding more domains or ranges - when the
property is used, all domain and range assertions are used to infer
new types for the individuals involved in the assertion.

> Indeed, what I found in the univ-bench ontology is that domain and range
> axioms for mastersDegreeFrom property are re-asserted though they are alrady
> asserted for the super-property degreeFrom? are not they a form of
> repetition? could not they be entailed?

That's correct - repeating the axioms for subproperties is redundant.
But it is not wrong, and other domains/ranges can be declared.

HTH,
I.

Received on Sunday, 29 January 2017 15:05:42 UTC