If someone would use rdfs:range reasoning over DBpedia, that would deduce all targets of boxerStyle to be of type BoxerStyle and therefore of type Boxing.
But rdfs:range reasoning is unfeasible at present since the object property extractor doesn't pay attention to range, so it would make tons of junk. You can already see this at http://fr.dbpedia.org/sparql with query
Until and unless we have an explicit list of horse riding disciplines and boxing disciplines in Wikipedia, treating HorseRiding and Boxing as classes is dangerous and misleading. Until you have an explicit answer to the question "what are the members of HorseRiding or Boxing", don't make these into classes.
Furthermore, OntologyClass:BoxingCategory and OntologyClass:BoxingStyle demonstrate lack of ontological thinking: only OntologyClass:Boxing is needed.
Searching for "horseriding" and "horse riding" finds only OntologyClass:HorseRiding and OntologyProperty:HorseRidingDiscipline, with no uses.
Searching for "boxing" finds more: OntologyClass:Boxing, OntologyProperty:BoxerStyle, OntologyClass:BoxingCategory, OntologyClass:BoxingStyle.
These are not used In Mapping sl:Infopolje Športna liga and Mapping tr:Futbol ligi bilgi kutusu:
sport="Boxing" is mapped to class BoxingLeague (a league is a set of teams, not a set of styles).
"boxerStyle" is used in Mapping fr:Infobox Boxeur:
If someone would use rdfs:range reasoning over DBpedia, that would deduce all targets of boxerStyle to be of type BoxerStyle and therefore of type Boxing.
But rdfs:range reasoning is unfeasible at present since the object property extractor doesn't pay attention to range, so it would make tons of junk. You can already see this at http://fr.dbpedia.org/sparql with query
For http://fr.dbpedia.org/resource/Buddy_Baer it returns Martinez_(Californie) and Californie, but this city and state are definitely not boxing styles. See https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Baer, the infobox has
Until and unless we have an explicit list of horse riding disciplines and boxing disciplines in Wikipedia, treating HorseRiding and Boxing as classes is dangerous and misleading. Until you have an explicit answer to the question "what are the members of HorseRiding or Boxing", don't make these into classes.
Furthermore, OntologyClass:BoxingCategory and OntologyClass:BoxingStyle demonstrate lack of ontological thinking: only OntologyClass:Boxing is needed.