Re: [ANN] Working drafts by SW Best Practices group -- request for comments

>>> :AfricanLion
>>>       a       :Animal;
>>>       rdfs:subClassOf :Lion .
>>>
>>> :Animal
>>>       a       owl:Class;
>>>       rdfs:subClassOf :Class .
>
>> I am not sure what :Class is.
>
> Sorry, this should be owl:Class. If I am not mistaken this makes the 
> AfricanLion both an individual *and* a class, which would address the 
> issue you outline below.

AfricanLion will also be a subclass of owl:Class, which will mean that 
all its instances are classes. In most applications, this is probably 
not what you want.

>>>   :LionsLifeInThePrideBook
>>>     owl:sameAs <http://isbn.nu/0736809643> ;
>>>
>>> rather than
>>>
>>>   :LionsLifeInThePrideBook
>>>     rdfs:seeAlso <http://isbn.nu/0736809643> ;
>
>> I am not sure. I think either solution is correct. I would lean 
>> towards the seeAlso simply because we don't have enough information 
>> to say that the resources are equivalent (by using owl:sameAs)
>
> I agree that rdfs:seeAlso is always a safe choice, though I would 
> argue that in this particular case we could dare provide additional 
> information by stating that the two resources represent the same 
> thing, rather than simply being related in some unspecified way.

I suppose. Although I don't think it makes a real difference in this 
example.

> Incidently, is it correct to assume that if
>
>   "x p a" and "y owl:sameAs x" then "y p a" ?

I would assume so, but I'll leave to the OWL gurus.

Natasha