From: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com> Subject: RE: comments on wine.owl Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 14:37:33 -0600 > So, to confirm some XML syntax. > > SubClassOf( TableWine, > intersectionOf( Wine, > restriction( hasSugar, hasValue( #Dry )))) > > Becomes: > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="TableWine"> > <owl:subClassOf> > <owl:Class> > <owl:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="Collection"> > <owl:Class rdf:about="#Wine" /> > <owl:Restriction> > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#hasSugar" /> > <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#Dry" /> > </owl:Restriction> > </owl:intersectionOf> > </owl:Class> > </owl:subClassOf> > </owl:Class> > > Which seem oddly asymmetric with > > EquivalentClasses( TableWine, > intersectionOf( Wine, > restriction( hasSugar, hasValue( #Dry )))) > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="TableWine"> > <owl:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="Collection"> > <owl:Class rdf:about="#Wine" /> > <owl:Restriction> > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#hasSugar" /> > <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#Dry" /> > </owl:Restriction> > </owl:intersectionOf> > </owl:Class> Yes, it is asymmetric. Welcome to the wonderful world of RDF. If it makes you happier you could consider the second to be an abbreviation. > Which could equivalently be written (?) > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="TableWine"> > <owl:sameClassAs> > <owl:Class> > <owl:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="Collection"> > <owl:Class rdf:about="#Wine" /> > <owl:Restriction> > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#hasSugar" /> > <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#Dry" /> > </owl:Restriction> > </owl:intersectionOf> > </owl:Class> > </owl:sameClassAs> > </owl:Class> Yes. The first example would more likely be written <owl:Class rdf:ID="TableWine"> <owl:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Wine" /> <owl:subClassOf> <owl:Restriction> <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#hasSugar" /> <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#Dry" /> </owl:Restriction> </owl:subClassOf> </owl:Class> peterReceived on Friday, 1 November 2002 15:52:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:55 GMT