W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2000

Re: Conventions and top-level ontologies for RDF

From: Jonas Liljegren <jonas@paranormal.se>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:27:28 +0200
Message-ID: <394FC5A0.DCBF17A6@paranormal.se>
To: Philippe Martin <Philippe.Martin@sophia.inria.fr>
CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Philippe Martin wrote:
> 
> There is already the class "ImaginarySpatialEntity" in my
> top-level ontology. It may be somewhat questionable regarding
> the world/space/time frame problem but it is a convenient
> generalization of classes such as "Unicorn" or "CartoonCharacter".

I'm intrested in modelling things somewhere in between thought and form.
And modelling theories, arguments, discussions, etc. I got som
inspiration from the CyC upper ontology.

I may try to map that schema onto the phOntology. Some points:

A entity can be material or immaterial, like the body and mind.

Immaterial things would include abstract things like particles, time,
energy, gravity, etc. What is their place in your ontology?

I alwo want to model theories, requests, arguments, instructions,
experiences etc. I would like to make a clear distinction between the
concept and the presentation of the concept. I don't see how I can
easily map this into the ph:InformationEntity.

I introduced the class Media, that included both material versions
(books) and immaterial versions (electronic documents). The media has
certain properies, and the information contained in the madia has other
properties. How do I represent this with your ontology?


-- 
/ Jonas  -  http://paranormal.se/myself/en/index.html
Received on Tuesday, 20 June 2000 15:25:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:43 GMT