- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 16:42:42 -0400 (EDT)
- To: pdawes@users.sourceforge.net
- Cc: b.fallenstein@gmx.de, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
From: "Phil Dawes" <pdawes@users.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: less-restrictive range and domain terms Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 20:30:59 +0100 > Hi Peter, > > Peter F. Patel-Schneider writes: > > > > > | So, show us the inferences! > > > > > > ~ flabber x:schnack ghasted > > > ~ ghasted rdf:type y:Ghostly > > > > > > =====> > > > > > > ~ x:schnack phil:rangeIncludes y:Ghostly > > > > This is *one* inference. What about the others? Are there any? > > how about: > > x:schnak rdfs:range aoeuii > =====> > x:schnak phil:rangeIncludes aoeuii Perhaps, but this doesn't follow from the intuitive meaning that you said you were thinking of. Either the intuitive meaning or the inference rule are wrong. > and maybe (if we're adopting 'range might feasibly include' > semantics): > > x:schnak rdfs:range aoeuii > baoeu rdfs:subClassOf aoeuii > =====> > x:schnak phil:rangeIncludes baoeu This is even worse. > and then there's the owl ones: > > owl:Class rdfs:subClassOf [a owl:Restriction; > owl:onProperty x:schnak; > owl:allValuesFrom aoeuii]. > =====> > x:schnak phil:rangeIncludes aoeuii. I don't think that you meant this, as it mixes up classes and metaclasses. > and > > owl:Class rdfs:subClassOf [a owl:Restriction; > owl:onProperty x:schnak; > owl:someValuesFrom aoeuii]. > =====> > x:schnak phil:rangeIncludes aoeuii. Ditto. > Cheers, > > Phil Peter F. Patel-Schneider Bell Labs Research
Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2004 16:44:35 UTC