Re: owl:Thing and RDF

I think that

- if you use OWL Full, then owl:Thing is equivalent to rdf:Resource, you can't
be more general than that:-)
- if you use OWL DL or Lite, than you *have* to use owl:Thing, this is the way
you identify individuals

Ie: the safe bet is to use owl:Thing. You do not loose anything and, if at some
point you have a smaller ontology that turns out DL or Lite, then you are all set.

Just my personal opinion...

Ivan

-------- Original Message --------
From: "Hans Teijgeler" <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl>
To: "Manola, Frank" <fmanola@acm.org>
CC: semantic-web@w3.org, "Paap, Onno" <onno.paap@ezzysurf.com>
Subject: owl:Thing and RDF
Date: 27/10/2005 08:22

> Hi Frank,
>
>
>
> After having defined all owl:Classes in OWL Full I am now confronted with
> the question whether I should represent all individuals either:
>
> -         with owl:Thing and rdf:type them with the applicable OWL Classes,
> or:
>
> -         in the RDF style, and rdf:type them with the applicable OWL
> Classes
>
> Can you shed some light on this? Are there advantages/disadvantages, or does
> it not matter?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>
>
> _______________________
>
> Hans Teijgeler
>
> ISO 15926 specialist
>
>  <http://www.InfowebML.ws> www.InfowebML.ws
>
>  <mailto:hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl> hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl
>
> phone +31-72-509 2005
>
>
>
>

--

Ivan Herman
W3C Communications Team, Head of Offices
C/o W3C Benelux Office at CWI, Kruislaan 413
1098SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
tel: +31-20-5924163; mobile: +31-641044153;
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/