W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: PROPOSAL to close issue 4.6 [was Re: SEM: peeking at approach to 4.6 EquivalentTo]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 04 Nov 2002 14:03:17 -0600
To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Cc: "Peter F. "Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1036440198.11279.4999.camel@dirk>

On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 13:54, Jeff Heflin wrote:
> 
> I could live with this, but would be much happier if we also had a
> generic sameAs property that could be used in place of the three longer
> named properties.

Note that this specification gives the generic meaning,
in large owl.

I prefer to call it sameAs too.

I was going to suggest that, since the domain/range isn't
really constrained to Individuals... but in fast OWL,
it is so constrained.

But now that somebody else has spoken up, I concur.

> I know this has come up before. Note, if someone used
> sameAs between a property and a class in OWL/DL, this would be no
> different than if they declared the same ID to be of both type Class and
> Property. 

Good point.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 4 November 2002 15:02:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:55 GMT