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

RE: some thoughts on the guide document

From: Smith, Michael K <michael.smith@eds.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 18:31:20 -0600
Message-ID: <B8E84F4D9F65D411803500508BE322141207F0C9@USPLM207>
To: Marwan Sabbouh <ms@mitre.org>
Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

> Apologies were  already covered on the mailing list.
> In the section titled "design for use"
> ... "but the that describe a set of individuals, and individuals are the
> members of those sets"
> 
> I found myself wondering if individuals are the same as instances of these
> classes.  If so, why not use instances to explain individuals.

Yes, they are the same.  Because of earlier complaints from the WG, we
have tried to uniformly call individual 'individuals' and not
'instances'. 

> On page No. 14:
[ clip ]
> Earlier in the document, you had the following:
> <owl:Class rdf:ID="Wine">
>   <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#PotableLiquid"/>
>   <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">wine</rdfs:label>
>   <rdfs:label xml:lang="fr">vin</rdfs:label>
>   ...
> </owl:Class>
> is that legal?  Know that label information is missing above.  If
>    

The ... are meant to indicate that the definition with respect to
wine.owl is not complete.  Might make sense to tell the reader that!
I will do so.

- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Marwan Sabbouh [mailto:ms@mitre.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 3:27 PM
To: michael.smith@eds.com
Subject: some thoughts on the guide document


Hi Mike;

I went over portions of the guide document.  I have the following
comments/questions.
Apologies were  already covered on the mailing list.
In the section titled "design for use"
... "but the that describe a set of individuals, and individuals are the
members of those sets"

I found myself wondering if individuals are the same as instances of these
classes.  If so, why not use instances to explain individuals.


On page No. 14:

"It is now possible to expand the definition of Wine to include the notion
of regions..."

<owl:Class rdf:ID="Wine">
  <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#PotableLiquid"/>
  <rdfs:subClassOf>
    <owl:Restriction>
      <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#madeFromGrape"/>
      <owl:minCardinality>1</owl:minCardinality>
    </owl:Restriction>
  </rdfs:subClassOf>
  <rdfs:subClassOf>
    <owl:Restriction>
      <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#locatedIn"/>
      <owl:minCardinality>1</owl:minCardinality>
    </owl:Restriction>
  </rdfs:subClassOf>
  ...
</Class>


Earlier in the document, you had the following:
<owl:Class rdf:ID="Wine">
  <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#PotableLiquid"/>
  <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">wine</rdfs:label>
  <rdfs:label xml:lang="fr">vin</rdfs:label>
  ...
</owl:Class>
is that legal?  Know that label information is missing above.  If
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 19:31:29 GMT

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