Skip to content


Subversion checkout URL

You can clone with
Download ZIP

Loading… type-properties relationships and rdfs:domain #9

bvatant opened this Issue · 1 comment

2 participants


Issue #7 discussion uses arguments based on a property domain, but itself does not define property domains in the formal sense of rdfs:domain. Actually loosely defines "expected" or "suggested" or "allowed" properties for a given type. At one can read that a type "has" properties.
The semantics of rdfs:domain is harder : bearing a property entails to be an instance of the class defined by the property domain.
The interpretation of the type-has-property declarations in terms of rdfs:domain is an assumption made by, but do we agree this is correct?


Just stumbled upon this issue via Google, so don't know whether it is current... but's official OWL version does use rdfs:domain to make domain constraints explicit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.