schema.org type-properties relationships and rdfs:domain

[bvatant]

Issue #7 discussion uses arguments based on a schema.org property domain, but schema.org itself does not define property domains in the formal sense of rdfs:domain. Actually schema.org loosely defines "expected" or "suggested" or "allowed" properties for a given type. At http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#schemaorg_types 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 schema.org type-has-property declarations in terms of rdfs:domain is an assumption made by rdfs.schema.org, but do we agree this is correct?

[linclark]

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