W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > May 2004

Re: Partially defined concepts

From: Paul Gearon <pag@tucanatech.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 09:46:43 +1000
Message-ID: <40A01463.6040707@tucanatech.com>
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org


I wasn't going to answer, as I'm still learning schema stuff and I may be 
wrong.  But if I am then it would be useful for me to be corrected by others.  :-)

Ander Altuna/LABEIN wrote:
> Then a company decides to extend the schema and create two new kinds of
> employee based on the previous class but with some concrete information
> about them, that is their nationality.
>       <rdf:description rdf:about="http://example.org#australian">
>             <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://example.org#employee"/>
>             <rdf:type rdf:resource="&rdfs;Class"/>
>             <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://example.org#employee"/>
>             <example:nationality>australian</example:nationality>
>       </rdf:description>

The way I understand it, this is a class (a subclass of employee) and not an 
instance.  It has type "&rdfs;Class", but it does not have type "employee".

An employee *instance* that has type "australian" will also have type 
"employee", but this is not an instance of an employee... it's a class 
describing employees.

Also, I believe that it's acceptable to leave out that "australian" has type 
"Class", because it is a subclass, and therefore must be of type class.  (On 
the other hand, you might not want to use an inferencer, in which case you 
could leave it in).

Paul Gearon

Software Engineer                Telephone:   +61 7 3876 2188
Tucana Technologies              Fax:         +61 7 3876 4899

Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum
immane mittam.
(Translation from latin: "I have a catapult. Give me all the money,
or I will fling an enormous rock at your head.")
Received on Monday, 10 May 2004 19:50:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:51 UTC