Re: Individuals with more than one rdf:type

On Sep 19, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Andrea Splendiani wrote:

>> Is there anything wrong with creating individuals with multiple  
>> rdf:type declarations?
> To my understanding, this is quite natural "per se".

Great -- I had assumed so, but couldn't find any specific information  
in the specs to back up my assumption...

> If the classes are not disjoint... MacBookPro will satisfy all  
> definitions of the three classes, including the properties  
> restriction that define it.

Excellent -- the ontologies generated by likn don't employ  
owl:disjointWith, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Thanks!

- ben syverson
likn.org