- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:42:36 +0200
- To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
I suggest we resolve the rdfs-container-membership-superProperty by defining one: e.g. rdfs:contains I suggest we then declare rdfs-constraining-containers as out of scope on the basis that it can be addressed by DAML+OIL. All indications are that OWL will contrinue to address this issue. The DAML+OIL mantra is: <daml:Restriction rdf:ID="ConstrainedContainer"> <rdfs:comment> This is the class of resources all of whose rdfs:contains edges point to a resource of type eg:ElementsConstrainedToThisClass. To have a Bag, a Seq or an Alt with such a constrained declare the resource to have both type Bag and type ConstrainedContainer. Alternatively construct a new class that subclasses both this class and the desired container class. </rdfs:comment> <daml:onProperty rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#contains"/> <daml:toClass rdf:resource="http://example.org/ElementsConstrainedToThisClass"/> </daml:Restriction> Reference: http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-walkthru#restrictions Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2002 09:36:11 UTC