W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > March 2002

Re: rdfs:Class vs. daml:Class ?

From: David Martin <martin@AI.SRI.COM>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:27:43 -0800
Message-ID: <3C92593F.DE08524B@ai.sri.com>
To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
I think some clarification of this question would be helpful to others of us as
well.  I was eager to read the Pan and Horrocks paper mentioned below, but the URL
is broken:

Not Found
The requested URL /jpan/Zhilin/download/Paper/Pan-Horrocks-rdfsfa-2001.pdf was not
found on this server.
Apache/1.3.9 Server at imgcs.cs.man.ac.uk Port 80

Can someone please post a working URL for this paper?

Thanks,

David

Steven Gollery wrote:

> Please excuse another naive newby question....
>
> In the DAML language definition, it looks like rdfs and rdf are being
> used as the metamodel: daml:Class, for example, is an instance of
> rdfs:Class. But if that is the case, I would expect that the Class
> definitions in a DAML ontology would be instances of daml:Class.
> Instead, the sample ontologies that I've seen use rdfs:Class either
> exclusively or (as far as I can tell) interchangeably with daml:Class.
>
> I understand from the Pan and Horrocks paper at
> http://img.cs.man.ac.uk/jpan/Zhilin/download/Paper/Pan-Horrocks-rdfsfa-2001.pdf
> that there is a layering problem in the RDF/RDF(S) definition that
> prevents a clean division between successive metamodel levels. Is the
> relationship between rdfs:Class and daml:Class somehow connected to
> this?
>
> I suppose all I'm really asking is: when would I use rdfs:Class and when
> would I use daml:Class? And if it doesn't matter, why are there two of
> them?
>
> Thanks for your patience,
>
> Steven Gollery
Received on Friday, 15 March 2002 15:24:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:42 GMT