Re: abstract class

Marc Carrion wrote:
 
>   You instantiate in RDF, when you create a resource
> and you say it's of type X, you have an instance of
> class X. At least that's our interpretation.

That's a misunderstanding. A more appropriate analogy
would be to view rdf:type as an interface declaration.

There is no concept of a 'real' class of a resource 
in RDF. Besides, you always can add more rdf:type
predicates to a resource afterwards, which may as well
be subtypes of already 'declared' types. This is
completely different from an OO instantiation concept.

- Wolf