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

Guide: Legal syntax?

From: Smith, Michael K <michael.smith@eds.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:22:43 -0600
Message-ID: <B8E84F4D9F65D411803500508BE32214117FFD77@USPLM207>
To: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>


The question arose in our breakout session on the Guide as to whether the
following is syntactically legal.  I had simply assumed it was.  The issue
is that we are combining what the abstract syntax labels a 'complete' class
equivalence with a 'partial' one.  E.g. white Burgundies are exactly the
intersection of Burgundy and WhiteWine AND white Burgundies are a subClass
of things made from the Chardonnay grape.

 <owl:Class rdf:ID="WhiteBurgundy">
    <owl:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="Collection">
      <owl:Class rdf:about="#Burgundy" />
      <owl:Class rdf:about="#WhiteWine" />
    </owl:intersectionOf>
    <rdfs:subClassOf>
      <owl:Restriction>
        <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#madeFromVarietal" />
        <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#ChardonnayGrape" />
      </owl:Restriction>
    </rdfs:subClassOf>
  </owl:Class>

As far as the XML syntax schema that Peter sent out, this looks fine, modulo
tag names like owl:SubClassOf.

- Mike

Michael K. Smith, Ph.D., P.E.
EDS - Austin Innovation Centre
98 San Jacinto, #500
Austin, TX  78701

* phone: +01-512-404-6683
* mailto:michael.smith@eds.com
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 12:33:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:53 GMT