On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 18:52, Brian McBride wrote: [...] > > You are saying owl:subClassOf can have a member <c1, c2> that is not a > member of rdfs:subClassOf? Stupid me. Of course it can! Hmm, so that means that an rdfs reasoner, seeing owl:subClassOf could not conclude rdfs:subClassOf. One of the things I've tended to say in public about rdfs is that it is intended to enable other languages to built on top of it, and that if there are more than one such language, they should at least share the rdfs concepts. I guess I'd have to stop saying that, a least for subClass, subproperty, domain? and range, which doesn't leave much. BrianReceived on Thursday, 26 June 2003 14:45:36 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:59 EDT