From: Frank van Harmelen (Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl)
Date: 12/25/00
In the ammended version of our introductory example (at http://www.cs.vu.nl/~frankh/spool/DAML+OIL/daml+oil-ex.daml) there are a few places where I refer to a property without having declared it as a property first.
For example:
<rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Person">
<restrictedBy>
<Restriction>
<onProperty rdf:resource="#spouse"/>
<maxcardinalityQ>1</maxcardinalityQ>
<hasClassQ rdf:resource="#Person"/>
</Restriction>
</restrictedBy>
</rdfs:Class>
places a qualified cardinality restriction on the property spouse applied to persons, while there has never been a statement declaring spouse to be a property, ie nothing like
<rdf:Property rdf:ID="spouse/>
appears anywhere (earlier or later) in the file.
QUESTION: is this legal? In DAML? In RDF? in RDF Schema?
The same happens with a class that is mentioned but never defined:
<Disjoint parseType="daml:collection">
<rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Car">
<rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Person">
<rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Plant">
</Disjoint>
appears without there ever being anywere anything like:
<rdfs:Class rdf:ID="Plant"/>
SAME QUESTION.
Frank.
----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST