- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 13:24:30 +0100
- To: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>, <www-webont-wg-request@w3.org>
> suppose you have a similar case > the range of p is one of 1,2,3,4 > the range of p is one of 3,4,5,6 > i is in a restriction on property p > with mincardinality of 2 > > is it then the case that > i p 3 > i p 4 Yes that is correct. > > I wouldn't think so as I (still) think > that ranges can come in via RDF merges > adding e.g. > the range of p is one of 2,4,6,8 > > (I think I can't live with the idea of > *closed* ranges...) > The ranges aren't closed the related case ls: > the range of p is one of 1,2,3,4 > the range of p is one of 3,4,5,6 > the range of p is one of 2,4,6,8 > i is in a restriction on property p > with mincardinality of 2 This is inconsistent and thus it entails > i p 3 > i p 4 (but it is less interesting this time round!). Jeremy
Received on Friday, 31 January 2003 07:24:40 UTC