- From: James Cerra <jfcst24_public@yahoo.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 09:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Claudio Gutierrez <cgutierr@dcc.uchile.cl>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, jos.deroo@agfa.com
- Cc: jfcst24_public@yahoo.com, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Thanks. From everyone's comments [1,2,3], I guess that either OWL or RDFS entailment is required, right? RDF alone doesn't define inferencing for subclasses (or support much of any inferencing really). -- Jimmy [1] Jos: i.e. making use of rdfs-rule [2] Jeremy: A point is that this is an rdfs rule - so if you are only using rdf or simple entailment, and not rdfs or owl entailment the result does not follow. [3] Claudio Gutierrez: The statements make sense only in the framework of RDFS (it uses rdfs:subClassOf, etc.), hence i am assuming your question is about RDFS-entailment. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates. http://personals.yahoo.com
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2005 16:19:35 UTC