- From: Rhoads, Stephen <SRhoads@ThruPoint.net>
- Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 13:09:24 -0400
- To: "'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <B24F5C4EDA48D511B6CB00508BDFC194BB85D8@nyexchclstr.thrupoint.net>
I have recently had a similar (although not precisely the same) problem with the UI of Protege. I particular, if you: (a) Choose not to use global domain and range constraints (for, among other reasons, the "open world" assumption), and (b) Have lots of optional and/or datatype properties which do not make sense to include in DLs for defined classes, then these properties will not show up at the (intended) classes in individuals forms. One must explicitly modify the forms for classes and the resultant data is stored in a separate file from the OWL ontology. If someone is looking at the ontology for the first time (or is otherwise not an expert in the domain of discourse) it is not immediately clear which classes are intended to be used with these types of properties. It would almost make sense to introduce a couple of annotation properties to say, for example, "this property is intended to be used with the following class (or classes), or "this property is intended to take as values the following class (or classes). This information would then be stored in the OWL file and could be directly exploited by ontology editors to offer up reasonable options to users. Just a thought. --- Stephen Phil Dawes wrote: Hi All, I've recently found myself wanting a less-restrictive version of rdfs:range (or owl:allValuesFrom) and rdfs:domain. I want to say 'property *can* have range of class foo' rather than 'property *must* have range of class foo'. I first came across this requirement with my veudas RDF browser when consuming RDF without schema information. Hints like 'can have range' help when rendering the editing UI. They can also be inferred easily from the RDF. The second example was attempting to implement a cross-store querying mechanism - I want to make statements like 'in the context of store A, property canHaveRange class' This works as a useful hint for the query chopper-upper to decide which patterns to run against which stores. Does such a term exist anywhere or shall i make one up? (or is there a better way? :-) Many thanks, Phil Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. ThruPoint, Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2004 13:13:37 UTC