Re: Denotation of owl:Class

Brian:
>  If its ok to feed only 
> some of the semantics to a DL reasoner, why not stick to rdfs:Class but let 
> it have only a limited understanding of Class?

I believe this statement is technically correct.

i.e. globally replace owl:Class by rdfs:Class in OWL S&AS and everything still 
works.

You cannot say owl:Class rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Class or the opposite in OWL 
Lite and OWL DL so the need for this distinction is moot.

Jeremy