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

Re: Partially defined concepts

From: Ander Altuna/LABEIN <aaltuna@labein.es>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 10:53:40 +0200
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFD2C1A727.8A77AA88-ONC1256E91.002FC6E2@labein.es>

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?



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
>instance.  It has type "&rdfs;Class", but it does not have type

>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 UTC

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