- From: Geoff Chappell <geoff@sover.net>
- Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:16:28 -0500
- To: "'Bijan Parsia'" <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: www-rdf-logic-request@w3.org [mailto:www-rdf-logic-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Bijan Parsia > Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 10:47 AM > To: Jeremy Carroll > Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org; abc def > Subject: Re: question on rdfs:domain > > [...] > > However, the rest of what I said still seems sensible. There are many > ways to make a property "inapplicable" either by restricting the domain > or range (and with inverses, it pretty much doesn't matter which). Any > which way, it ensures that there can be no (consistent) instantiation > of the property in your KB. Just wondering about your example: an owl;Restriction onProperty someProperty someValuesFrom owl:Nothing and: "If you make these a superclass of owl:Thing... " Doesn't this restriction require that something exists of type owl:Nothing? -Geoff > > Cheers, > Bijan Parsia.
Received on Monday, 21 February 2005 16:16:53 UTC