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

Re: Converting SHOE to RDF: about 2/3 done; some gotchas

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 03:31:51 -0500
Message-ID: <3924FBF7.8FD096BC@w3.org>
To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cs.umd.edu>
CC: Sean Luke <seanl@cs.umd.edu>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Jeff Heflin wrote:
> 
> Dan Connolly wrote:
> >
> > Sean Luke wrote:
> > >
> > > [context everyone: Jeff does SHOE, Dan is working informally on a SHOE ->
> > > RDF converter and had asked some SHOE questions]
> > >
> > > On Fri, 12 May 2000, Dan Connolly wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jeff Heflin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > <rdfs:Class rdf:about="http://schema.org/web#Web_Developer">
> > > > >   <rdfs:subclassOf rdf:resource="#Silly_Person">
> > > > > </rdfs:Class>
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not see any restrictions in the RDFS spec to prevent such a
> > > > > statement.
> > > >
> > > > Why should we prevent such a statement? Anyone can say anything
> > > > about anything, no?
> > >
> 
> I was not trying to say that such a statement should be prevented, just
> that without something else built on top of RDF/RDFS it will cause
> problems. Recall that the original purpose of my example was to show
> that SHOE Use-Ontology elements serve as more than just namespace
> identifiers. In SHOE, a Use-Ontology tag states that the referenced
> ontology provides additional information for interpreting the page. This
> information includes machine-readable definitions of the terms used. As
> such, it is similar to the "include" or "assert" constructs proposed by
> Tim Berners-Lee in
> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Toolbox.html#Assertion.

Ah. Thanks for making the effort to explain it in terms I'm
familiar with. Now I think I get it.

More on the other stuff later, I hope...

> > > [snip]


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 19 May 2000 04:32:06 GMT

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