RE: definitionOf

> 2. individualOf vs. type
>  a. subject isu object
>      iff subject has individualOf = object
>      subject must be an individual
>  b. subject has type = object
>      subject can be any individual or any subClass of object

Are you sure that is the correct definition of rdf:type? My understanding
was that rdf:type was as you have expressed your proposed owl:individualOf
here.

> 3. definitionOf expressed in triples
> I have not made any specific proposal for representing this "quad" in >
triples.

Since you are proposing it be used with a triple-based language, it might be
an idea to do so.