But then, if australian employee is a just a subclass of employee, we can`t define the value of the property nationality. The subclass australian employee would have the propertiy nationality without defining. Can't we define a subconcept associating a value to some properties, so any instance of this subconcept would have some values predefined? Cheers, Ander Paul Gearon wrote: >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.Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2004 05:02:18 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:07 GMT