- From: zze-VALLEE Mathieu RD-TECH-GRE <mathieu.vallee@rd.francetelecom.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 16:31:59 +0200
- To: martin@AI.SRI.COM
- Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org
David Martin wrote: > De Furio Ivano wrote: > > 2) Another, strange thing (at least for me) is that both ontology > > http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.0/Profile.owl and > > http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.0/Process.owl define hasParameter > > as a owl:ObjectProperty with a well defined domain. But, hasInput and > > hasOutput, was defined as subPropertyOf hasParameter without a defined > > domain. > > > > I wasn't able to find that subPropertyOf implies a domain inheritance, > > so maibe should be better to repeat the domain. > Yes, subPropertyOf does imply domain inheritance, so it's okay not to repeat the domain. Is there a special reason not to repeat the domain (apart from avoiding redundancy) ? When I edit services using Protege (and OWL plugin), it seems that I must add the domain for hasInput and hasOutput properties. If not, Protege only allows me to use the hasParameter property (it does not include reasoning to deduce this kind of domain inheritance). However, this kind of troubles may be solved by the (future) OWL-S editor :-) Regards, Mathieu -- zze-VALLEE Mathieu RD-TECH-GRE <mathieu.vallee@rd.francetelecom.com> TECH / ONE
Received on Friday, 23 July 2004 10:36:54 UTC