RE: DTTF: summary (gasp!)

> > [...]
> >
> > > In particular the following implication that is valid under RDFS will
> > > not hold under OWL.
> > >
> > > eg:prop rdfs:subClassOf owl:Restriction .
> > > _:x rdf:type eg:prop .
> > >
> > > entails
> > >
> > > _:x rdf:type owl:Restriction .
> >
> > let's decide on this one
> > for me this entailment is OK under OWL (as well as under RDFS)
> >
> > --
> > Jos
> >
>
> Making owl restrictions be elements of the domain of discourse is one of
> the most, if not the most, dangerous things to do.
>
> That said, it would be possible to have the above entailment go through
> (maybe) even if owl restrictions are not elements of the domain of
> discourse.

really!?
can you please elaborate a bit on that?

>            But if owl restrictions are not elements of the domain of
> discourse, why bother with things like this?
>
> peter

--
Jos