- From: Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 10:06:29 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
> using both rdfs:Class and owl:Class as type. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-rdf-based-semantics defines > rdfs:Class rdfs:subClassOf owl:Class . > My view: rdfs:Class only is sufficient. Whereas under OWL Full both owl:Class and rdfs:subClassOf are totally equivalent, OWL DL classes are subject to some restrictions that grant that some reasoning processes can be computed. I made the small experiment of implementing your proposal, and my reasoner apparently does not complain and says everything stays within low complexity. I also could not find additional discussions on the web about this, but in any case I'd be cautious. Any other opinion? -- GitHub Notification of comment by vroddon Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/188#issuecomment-306151707 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 5 June 2017 10:06:35 UTC