- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:11:56 -0400
- To: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Cc: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>, RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:01:51 +0200 Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it> wrote: > >>>> Also, doesn't > >>>> BLD allow the range and domain of # to be much larger than OWL-DL does for type? > >>> That has already been taken care of by the restrictions imposed by RIF/OWL-DL > >>> combo. > >> Such restrictions are currently not there, but they could be added. > > > > My understanding is that the restrictions are there > > for ...[rdfs:subclassOf->...] and we simply need to re-use them for ##. > > Well, not for subclassof (this plays no role in RIF-OWL DL > compatibility), but it is there for rdf:type. yes. I keep sliding into that rdfs:subclassOf heresy :-)
Received on Thursday, 10 September 2009 18:12:44 UTC