WG: Cases in the new specification of RDF Schema

> 2. A Property would own multiple domains and rangs. It would like such
> as following:
>
> <rdf:Property rdf:about="a">
> 	<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#A"/>
> 	<rdfs:range    rdf:resource="#B"/>
> 	<rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#C"/>
> 	<rdfs:range    rdf:resource="#D"/>
> 	...
> 	...
> </rdf:Property>

And this, but it probably doesnt mean what you think it does. It would
make anything that was in the domain of 'a' a member of #A and #C.

My RDF Schema should assert that the domain of 'a' must contain only
members of #A and #C, and the range of 'a' must contain only members of
#B and #D.

> 3. I define some relationships between resources via rdfs:Property.
>
> I like to know, wether RDF Schema should accept transitive closure,
what
> there is in mathematics such as  X ~ Y AND Y~Z  ----> X ~Z
(transitive).
> (if RDF accepts multiple domains and rangs) For example:

No, you need to go to OWL for that.

i.e. I can use the RDF Schema without solicitude that this transitive
effect will NOT occur.


Eshaghi