Re: less-restrictive range and domain terms

Jeremy Carroll writes:
 > 
 > Not endorsing rangeIncludes, but taking Peter's challenge
 > 
[...]
 > > 
 > > This is *one* inference.  What about the others?  Are there any?
 > 
 > What about
 > 
 >   x:schnack phil:rangeIncludes y:Ghostly
 > ===>
 >   _:a x:schnack _:b .
 >   _:b rdf:type y:Ghostly .
 > 

Actually that was the inference I was trying to avoid. Unless I'm
mistaken it effectively forces all resources that are objects in a
triple with property x:schnak to be of rdf:type y:Ghostly.  
(as rdfs:range does).

Cheers,

Phil

Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2004 16:04:49 UTC