Chris, > Finally, and importantly, OO subclass is NOT subsumption, which was > precisely my point. It is almost subsumption, but there is this > subtle difference. This is what the note needs to make clear. There > is no way, in first-order logic, OWL, or RDF to characterize the > notion of "the class used when an object was created". Really? Not quite what you are referring to, but OKBC for example had this notion of "direct-type", which was exactly this. and you can axiomatize it in FOL, I think, as a class C that it is a type of X such that no other subclass of C is also a type of X. Am I missing something? NatashaReceived on Friday, 22 October 2004 21:36:38 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:13 GMT