- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 11:47:04 -0500
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>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. Except that there would then be entailments that weren't legal in OWL-DL. >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. But the point is that OWL-DL needs a name for its universe that it can use. It can't define it, and probably OWL-Full can't either, in fact. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Saturday, 26 April 2003 12:47:07 UTC