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

Re: subclasses (RDF vocabulary definitions)

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 17:39:53 -0500
Message-ID: <3DDEB239.6010205@mitre.org>
To: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@cdepot.net>
CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

Richard H. McCullough wrote:

> I like to talk about reality.


Well, so do I.


> 
> Man subsumes all men, past, present and future.
> 
> Ditto for Animal.

> 
> if  Animal  rdfs:sameAs  Man


There isn't any such thing as rdfs:sameAs;  that's why I didn't put an 
rdfs prefix on it in my example.  I was using that term to try to 
describe an aspect of rdfs:subClassOf that we were talking about.


> 
> it means that Animal and Man are identical,
> 
> that Man is an alias of Animal and vice versa.
> 


Yep.

  
> 
> Now if you're going to tell me that RDFS can't describe reality,
> 
> then I'm not interested in RDFS.


RDFS can't describe reality.  It can describe some parts of reality, 
adequately for many useful purposes (as a number of people have found). 
  Richer languages (like OWL) can describe more of reality, and still 
richer languages can describe even more of reality.

But it seems as if we're fated to want to use different language to talk 
about reality, even the small corner of reality dealing with computer 
languages for describing (parts of) reality!


--Frank


-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 17:22:58 GMT

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