- From: Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:54:01 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- CC: public-swbp-wg@w3.org, hobbs@ISI.EDU, Feng Pan <pan@ISI.EDU>
On 30/06/2006 17:28, Pat Hayes wrote: > >> Hi Dan, >> >> Thank you for your comment. The redundant equivalentClass will be >> removed in the >> next edition of the time ontology note. > > This kind of redundancy is quite common in published OWL ontologies, we > have found. Is it an artifact of some ontology composing tool, does > anyone know? I've seen it from Protege. I've assumed it was an idiom for expressing closed classes. Ian -- http://purl.org/NET/iand Blogging at... http://iandavis.com/blog Working on... http://directory.talis.com/
Received on Friday, 30 June 2006 17:54:42 UTC