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

Re: comparing DAML-ONT and OIL (was Re: semantics of daml)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:31:04 -0400
To: connolly@w3.org
Cc: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-Id: <20001015113104I.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Subject: Re: comparing DAML-ONT and OIL (was Re: semantics of daml)
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 22:59:58 -0500

> "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Capabilities
> > 
> >   Built in Classes              thing, nothing          thing, nothing
> 
> I'm not sure what "built in" classes are... in DAML,
> Thing and Nothing are just classes, like Property
> and Class and Animal and all the rest.

Built-in classes have prespecified meanings.  This makes Thing very
different from Animal.  DAML-ONT inherits more built-in classes from RDF,
such as Class, but I didn't include them.

Peter Patel-Schneider
Received on Sunday, 15 October 2000 11:32:02 GMT

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