W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > June 2010

Re: 'owl:Class and rdfs:Class' vs. 'owl:Class or rdfs:Class'

From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 14:18:23 +0100
To: Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100616141823.2fd36517@miranda.g5n.co.uk>
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 14:37:29 +0200
Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net> wrote:

> - if one uses OWL features for modelling an ontology, define the 
> concepts only with owl:Class, because RDFS systems, wouldn't know how
> to handle these features

I think most times people use OWL for modelling an ontology, they also
tend to sprinkle in bits of RDFS (most importantly: rdfs:subPropertyOf,
rdfs:subClassOf, rdfs:domain, rdfs:range).

So RDFS reasoning systems should still be able to perform some reasoning
on the OWL ontology, even if they're not able to infer quite as much as
an OWL DL or OWL Full processor.

-- 
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2010 13:19:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:36 GMT