- From: <tarod@softhome.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 15:10:43 GMT
- To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org, www-rdf-interest@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Good try but I must say that it's not 100% what I asked for because for
the range issue you use
Class C
A is subClassOf C
B is subClassOf C
And then c range is C. It's a good aproach but it's not logically
correct, you are saying that range of c is (C or A or B) and I asked for
range of c should be (A or B)
Now try it with the old aproach it's easier.
Good luck,
Marc
Seth Russell writes:
> How about this?
>
> http://robustai.net/mentography/rdfs_domain_range2.gif
>
> Seth Russell
>
> ----in response to---
> From: <tarod@softhome.net>
>
> > Just for playing.
> >
> > if you followed the mails between Brian McBride and I, you will know
> > about the different semantics for range and domain properties.
> >
> > His proposal is the official, mine is just what I think it should be
> > (just me)
> >
> > So, I wanted to propose to the 'gurus' a little challenge
> >
> > Try to represent that in rdf schema
> >
> > Class A
> > Class B
> >
> > property c(range(A or B), domain(A and B))
> >
> > using both semantics (disjoint, conjuntion)
> > of course you can add as many classes and properties you need and the
> > relations between them you need.
> >
> > Thanks for your time,
> > Marc
>
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2002 10:07:56 UTC