W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2002

RE: definitionOf

From: Jon Hanna <jon@spin.ie>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:57:04 -0000
To: "RDF-Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBLCBLIMDOPKMOPHLHKENOEJAA.jon@spin.ie>

> No.

An accurate answer perhaps, but not a useful one. Please remember that some
of us are hackers, not logicians.

What makes "Jon Hanna" operate at a different level to "Man" or "Animal".
Certainly there are some things that are true of "Jon Hanna" that are not
true of "Man", and some true of "Man" that are not true of "Animal".

However I wish to know what difference needs to be stated at the level we
are working at here beyond the fact that "Man" and "Animal" are Classes and
"Jon Hanna" is not.

In other words what objection do you have to one treating "Man" as a
individual, and allowing creationists to say <_:Man> <dc:creator> <_:God>
and evolutionists to refute this! Or if this is not treating "Man" as an
individual, why is it not?
Received on Tuesday, 19 November 2002 13:50:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:57 GMT