- From: Hart, Lewis <lhart@grci.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 13:52:49 -0500
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Comments and questions on the latest this release... 1. The label of minCardinalityQ, maxCardinalityQ, and cardinalityQ are missing the 'Q'. 2. Should UniqueProperty be a subClassOf ObjectProperty, similar to TransitiveProperty and UnambiguousProperty? 3. Should samePropertyAs have domain and range specified of Property, similar to sameClassAs having domain and range of Class? 4. Should hasValue have a range of value? 5. I may be missing something with these next few questions, if so someone please point me to enlightenment. a. Why are some properties daml:Property while others are rdf:Property? For example, unionOf is of type rdf:Property, but has domain and range of daml:Class and daml:List. <rdf:Property rdf:ID="unionOf"> ... <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Class"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#List"/> </rdf:Property> Why is it not defined like this: <Property rdf:ID="unionOf"> ... <domain rdf:resource="#Class"/> <range rdf:resource="#List"/> </Property> b. Aren't these the same, given the "same as" declarations at the end of the definition? c. Shouldn't most the rdf:Property definitions use daml:ObjectProperty instead. For example, unionOf, disjointUnionOf, intersectionOf, ... I would think that using the DAML namespace elements would be the preferred approach, but like I said I may be missing the point. Thanks. - Lewis PS I kind of like ObjectProperty and DataTypeProperty, they remind me of UML association and attribute ;-) ___________________________________________ Lewis L Hart GRC International lhart@grci.com 1900 Gallows Rd. Voice (703)506-5938 Vienna, Va 22182 Fax (703)556-4261
Received on Friday, 30 March 2001 13:53:44 UTC