Relation pm#generalizing_type (?,pm#type)  fuzzy category, DO NOT USE DIRECTLY
  supertype:  pm#partial_ordering_relation  this category only serves structuration purposes: it is instance of pm#partial_ordering_relation_type which is not instance of pm#class_of_inheritable_relation_type
  instance of:  pm#partial_ordering_relation_type
  inverse:  pm#specializing_type
  equal:  nsm#kind_of
  subtype:  pm#supertype (pm#type,pm#type)  in the FT notation, the '<' link is only used to connect to a "strict" supertype
     subtype:  rdfs#sub_class_of__subclassof__super_class__superclas (rdfs#class,rdfs#class)  in WebKB, use the link '<'
     subtype:  sumo#subrelation (pm#relation_type,pm#relation_type)  if the common reading conventions of parameters had been respected, this type would have been named subclass_of; every tuple of the 1st argument (r1) is also a tuple of the 2nd argument (r2), i.e. if r1 holds for some arguments arg_1, arg_2, ... arg_n, then the r2 holds for the same arguments; a consequence of this is that a relation and its subrelations must have the same valence
        subtype:  rdfs#sub_property_of (pm#binary_relation_type,pm#binary_relation_type)  in WebKB, use the link '<'
  subtype:  pm#kind__type___class___instance_of__instanceof (?,rdfs#class)  the '^' link in the FT notation


Another search (with same display options)?