Re: Inferring Class Membership w/o OWL Full?

>> On the other hand, why not just use rdf:type? What do you gain from the 

>> explicit subpropertying?

Protege w/ the OWL Plugin -- which I am using to develop the Ontology -- 
doesn't support multiple types.  One must edit the OWL file outside of 
Protege in order to add the additional types.

That's fine for me, but maybe not for average Joe.  When I publish the 
Ontology, I would like to be able to say, "here's the OWL file and a 
Protege Project file ... download, install, go to Individuals Tab, and 
bada-boom -- you're in business".  "(I even laid the Forms out nice 'n 
neat for ya)".

Beyond that, I just think it is a more intuitive way of dealing with the 
task.

But alas, I shall use rdf:type, lest I add another infraction to my Rap 
Sheet. ;-)