- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 01:46:10 +0100
- To: "Pat Hayes <phayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: "Dan Connolly <connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
[...] >Still, we do need something. So how about using drange to do it. In >other words, lets make the following extra specification on drange: >when ddd is a datatype property, > >ddd rdfs:drange aaa . > >means that (the class extension of) aaa is *precisely* the range of >ddd, ie precisely the lexical space of the datatype, We already have >a name for the precise value space of the datatype, so the other end >is, er, sharp already. Then the pair of shared-bnode triples above >would work if the first one said drange instead of range. > >This means drange exerts an extra kind of semantic magic, but only >when applied to a datatype property. This doesn't interfere with the >other magic attached to drange since that only kicks in if the object >is a datatype class, and that's never going to happen in this case >(unless there are two datatypes with the lexical class of one being >the value class of another?? .... Nah, never happens)(And even if it >did, it wouldn't cause any damage.) And it doesn't infect the rest >of RDFS since this magic only applies to lexical spaces of datatypes >which are just the ones where we really can tell if something is NOT >in the class in question, so it doesn't sneak negation into RDFS by >the back door. well, I actually (before your email) wrote it here on a piece of paper for :Jenny :age "35". constrain :age rdfs:range _:1. xsd:number rdfs:drange _:1. or :age rdfs:range _:1. _:1 rdfs:drangeOf xsd:number. another possibility is to say that :age is the chaining of _:age and xsd:number but we don't have property chaining... -- Jos
Received on Monday, 18 February 2002 19:46:50 UTC