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

Re: Chainsaw?

From: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 10:40:40 +0000
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001109103740.00dd7240@pop.dial.pipex.com>
To: Tom Van Eetvelde <tom.van_eetvelde@alcatel.be>
Cc: RDF interest group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
At 11:08 AM 11/8/00 +0100, Tom Van Eetvelde wrote:
>Suppose you have the class insects. You want to say that this class is 
>big. That doesn't mean of
>course that every class instance is big.

Nice one!

>Can this be solved via a new constraintproperty 'commonInstanceValue' (I 
>am not creative enough at
>the moment to invent a nice name) and leaving 'domain' as it is in the 
>specification? This way, it
>is explicit which class properties may be applied to class instances and 
>instances of subclasses and
>which not.

My understanding is that OIL and friends use slots and slot-constraints in 
this way (I think this descends from earlier work on frames).

#g
--


> > At 11:26 AM 10/23/00 +0200, Tom Van Eetvelde wrote:
> > >Bad idea! :-) I believe my proposal can model in a more natural way what
> > >you want to do.
> >
> > Tom,
> >
> > I accept that my original idea was not great, but I have one problem with
> > your proposal.  My concern applies to your proposal in the "definition of
> > domain" thread, and also to the counter-example you offer to mine:
> >
> > ><rdfs:Class ID="Ford_Escort">
> > ><rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="Car"/>
> > ><s:bodyStyle> Hatchback </s:bodyStyle>
> > ><s:engine_fueltype> Petrol </s:engine_fueltype>
> > ></rdfs:Class>
> >
> > I accept the idea of using a class as a kind of prototype, but have a
> > problem with this particular representation.  Specifically, how statements
> > about the class be distinguished from statements about instances of the
> > class;  e.g.  I might wish to say something like:
> >
> >     [FordEscord] --rdf:type---> [rdfs:Class]
> >     [          ] --definedBy--> [FordMotorCompany]
> >     [          ] --bodyStyle--> "HatchBack"
> >     (etc.)
> >
> > Here, the intent of the properties "definedBy" and "bodyStyle" is very
> > different.  One is a statement about the class itself, and the other is a
> > prototype for instances of the class.
> >
> > I'm still thinking about this stuff, so I'll pursue this further as I bet
> > my ideas sorted.
> >
> > #g
> > --
> >
> > ------------
> > Graham Klyne
> > (GK@ACM.ORG)

------------
Graham Klyne
(GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Thursday, 9 November 2000 05:13:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:46 GMT