Referring to my recent email, it occurs to me that the backward compatibility condition can be more elegantly stated as owl:Resource rdfs:subClassOf owl:UQResource . and that this can be regarded as an extra semantic condition on OWL/RDF 1.0 ontologies. Since this condition is vacuous in a purely OWL 1.0 framework, it is harmless there, but it provides the semantic 'bridge' to enable OWL 1.0 to be considered a subset of OWL 1.1. I presume that the OWL version will be available eg from the XML header, so processors will know whether or not this condition applies. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayesReceived on Monday, 17 December 2007 00:01:03 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:41:55 GMT