- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 16:54:16 +0000
- To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Cc: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 23 Mar 2009, at 16:41, Jonathan Rees wrote: > "5.1 Classes can be understood as sets of individuals." > > This should be something like: > > "5.1 Classes represent sets of objects from the domain." > or > "5.1 Classes represent sets of (semantic) individuals." > > First, classes are (syntactic) entities, so they can't be > understood as sets; they must be understood as representing sets. Nope. It's perfectly normal English to say "can be understood" as "representing". Use/mention moves like this are done *alll the time* in normal English. In technical prose, *sometimes*, when the language is formal, one adds "by abuse of notation". I think the current text is perfectly fine. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Monday, 23 March 2009 16:55:52 UTC