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

Re: subclasses (RDF vocabulary definitions)

From: Richard H. McCullough <rhm@cdepot.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:15:40 -0800
Message-ID: <004101c2929e$9ab49850$bd7ba8c0@rhm8200>
To: "Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, "David Menendez" <zednenem@psualum.com>, "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
re sameAs
I just looked and couldn't find it either.  I'm not sure now if my original find was rdfs:sameAs or owl:sameAs.
In either case, it seems to have been willed out of existence by the current update of documents.

What I did find just now:
    http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-owl-features-20020729/ 
    OWL Lite
    sameClassAs
    samePropertyAs
    sameIndividualAs
    differentIndividualFrom
============ 
Dick McCullough 
knowledge := man do identify od existent done
knowledge haspart list of proposition

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Frank Manola 
  To: Richard H. McCullough 
  Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org ; David Menendez ; Brian McBride 
  Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 2:39 PM
  Subject: Re: subclasses (RDF vocabulary definitions)


  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 22:15:42 GMT

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