- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 14:52:47 +0100
- To: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@appmosphere.com>
- Cc: Alexandre Passant <alex@passant.org>, public-xg-geo@w3.org
Hi Benjamin Thanks for those clarifications on RDFS semantics. Actually many people are not clearly aware of the two aspects (necessary and sufficient) of rdfs:range and rdfs:domain semantics. I'm pretty sure most applications relying on those semantics, as well as their builders and users, consider only the "necessary" aspect. (1) "If a resource R is (of class X) in the domain of P, then you can attach a P-value to R". wheras the "sufficient" aspect (2) "If a resource R has a P-value, then R belongs to (some class in) the domain of P" will be used in those applications in its contrapositive form (3) "If a resource R is (of class X) not in the domain of property P, then you can't attach a P-value to R" (1) and (3) are used to control edition interfaces, whereas (2) will need a reasoner/classifier. The former are more frequent and familiar than the latter, hence (2) is sometime forgotten or misunderstood. Bernard > On 28.01.2007 17:46:28, Alexandre Passant wrote: > >> Right, but what about using based_near for something that is not a >> spatial thing ? >> The only way to do is to assert this is a Spatial Thing, isn't it ? >> > I can't think of a non-spatial thing that's based near something > (unless you use "near" in a temporal sense). > > >> But since foaf:Organisation is not a subclass of geo84:SpatialThing >> (but foaf:Person is), I have to create an union class with foaf:org + >> geo84:ST to use based_near with this org ? >> > No, "Descriptive, not prescriptive" means that you don't have to > pre-define rules before you can use certain RDF terms. The orgs > you'd like to use based_near with are spatial things. > > From > > :org foaf:based_near :x . > > you can infer that > > :org a geo:SpatialThing . > :x a geo:SpatialThing . > > The description > > foaf:based_near rdfs:domain geo:SpatialThing . > > does not say that only resoures explicitly typed as spatial things are > "allowed" to use foaf:based_near. It's exactly the other way round: > Resources which use foaf:based_near *are* spatial things. Independent > of other types they may have. (In OWL you can construct axioms to > identify/prevent inconsistencies, but not in RDF Schema. The latter > can only increase the total number of triples, but never reduces them.) > > Bottom line: You simply don't use foaf:based_near with resources > [in the subset of foaf:Organization] that aren't spatial things. > > > cheers, > Benjamin > -- *Bernard Vatant *Knowledge Engineering ---------------------------------------------------- *Mondeca** *3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France Web: www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com> ---------------------------------------------------- Tel: +33 (0) 871 488 459 Mail: bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> Blog: Leçons de Choses <http://mondeca.wordpress.com/>
Received on Monday, 29 January 2007 13:52:56 UTC