On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:53:37AM +1000, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> Constraints are inherited from superclasses, i.e. subclasses can
> only narrow down superclasses. That aligns with typical RDFS/OWL
> semantics and therefore inferencing is no problem. In fact the LDOM
> engine will walk up the class hierarchy to collect constraints
> anyway. I would not consider this a bug but a feature.
I'm not aware that RDFS semantics includes any notion of 'inheritance'.
What does an RDFS subclass 'inherit' from its superclass?
OOP classes have inheritance, but they also allow names to be
overridden. Could 'constraints' be overridden in LDOM, as you see it,
and what implications would that have for RDFS subclass relations?
> Likewise, pretending that "Shapes" are something different than
> classes unnecessarily alienates a potentially very large user base.
To my way of thinking, saying that shapes are RDF classes, or that they
can have inheritance relationships to each other, risks unnecessarily
confusing the users.
Tom
--
Tom Baker <[log in to unmask]>
|