Re: referendum on httpRange-14 (was RE: "information resource")

* Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org> [2004-11-29 20:53-0500]

> Yes, there were constraints on what you can do with literals from 
> reasoning in OWL, just as there are constraints that you can't for 
> example have a datatype property be an inverse functional property 
> (like social security number is supposed to be).  But I don't believe 
> it is the place of the RDF layer to try to enforce these things.  

Aside: this constraint (no datatype IFPs) is only in OWL Lite and 
OWL DL, I believe. OWL Full doesn't care, nor (as you say) does RDF/S. 
FWIW I describe foaf:mbox_sha1sum as an owl:InverseFunctionalProperty and the 
sky hasn't yet fallen in. I get complaints from DL-oriented implementors, 
but afaik the usage is 'legal'.

Da

Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2004 02:06:14 UTC