W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > October 2000

Re: semantics of daml:equivalentTo [was: Comments on Annotat

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:56:28 -0500
Message-ID: <39E4A9CC.87601B35@w3.org>
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
CC: " - *www-rdf-logic@w3.org" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote:
> 
> Is there any reason for not having SymmetricProperty and
> ReflexiveProperty classes?

No, no particular reason. Except... hmm... it was
discussed briefly with a few folks, and I took
away from that discussion that no, these could
wait for a future version or a layer on top or something.

Would anybody else care to second this request for
enhancement? Any particular practical motivation?
Anybody have tools that could exploit them,
or tools that suffer for the lack of them, or
ontologies that you're building that are particularly
awkward without them?

Better yet: how about writing a schema/ontology for these
and putting it in the Web, showing how it works, and
seeing if anybody else finds it useful?

> and EquivalentProperty class?
> (which is redundant, but good for deductions)

Seems just as reasonable.

> Can we then say type(equivalentTo, EquivalentProperty)?

Yes, we could.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 11 October 2000 13:56:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:37 GMT