- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 21:12:50 -0400
- To: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@cpe.fr>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
At 10:00 AM 9/27/1999 +0100, Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN wrote: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/1999JulSep/0048 >If we have > (rdf:domain, P1, C1) > (rdf:domain, P1, C2) > (P1, r1, r2) >then r1 must have rdf:type C1 OR C2. Ok. yes >If we add > (rdfs:subPropertyOf, P2, P1) > (rdf:domain, P2, C3) > (rdf:domain, P2, C4) > (P2, r3, r4) >what is the rule : > r3 must have rdf:type C1, C2, C3 or C4 >or > r3 must have rdf:type C1 or C2, and it must have rdf:type C3 or C4 > ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ > because of P1 because of P2 > >the second is more complicated, but looks also more logical to me... yes, the second; r3 has two constraints on its type. In this case r3 must be in the domain of P2 *and* in the domain of P1.
Received on Friday, 22 October 1999 21:13:05 UTC