Re: Thing and Class

Richard,

> I have also thought of a good way to focus on my concerns.
> I will take a simple example, maybe the one offered by
> James Leigh, and do a complete individual hierarchy
> using all "type" and "subClassOf" links -- according to
> RDF/OWL, not according to mKR.
>
> I hope you won't mind if I use a notation similar to mKR
> to distinguish between "type" and "subClassOf" links.
> I plan to show
>   x  type  y
> as (that's an "i:" prefix)
> y
> /  i:x
> and
>   x  subClassOf  y
> as
> y
> /  x

as an interested listener to your discussion, may I ask you to,  
instead of your "similar to mKR" notation, just use the common RDF/OWL  
vocabulary, i.e.,

x rdf:type y
a rdfs:subClassOf b

to avoid confusion. These terms are understandable to (probably) all  
readers of the list, and they are well defined.

> I'll have the example done tomorrow.

Looking forward to that.

Best, Bernhard

-- 
Web of Data Practictioners Days: Oct 22-23, Vienna, Austria
<http://www.webofdata.info>

-- 
Bernhard Schandl
University of Vienna
Faculty    of Computer Science
Department of Distributed and Multimedia Systems
web   : http://www.cs.univie.ac.at/bernhard.schandl
phone : +43-1-4277-39621
fax   : +43-1-4277-39649