- From: Sebastian Rudolph <rudolph@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
- Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 21:41:27 +0200
- To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Dear all, if I interpreted the intention of the below LC comment correctly, Richard would like to see an explicit statement that classes just represent sets of individuals and that the notion of a "concept" is something related but different. I tried to address this by adding two sentences to the Primer document, see the diff at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Primer&diff=23464&oldid=23440 Find the proposed draft response at: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC2_Responses/RHM1 Cheers, Sebastian > From: Richard H. McCullough <rhm@pioneerca.com> > Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 09:55:13 -0700 > Message-ID: <145E35AF107F4AC2813FBC6C6311C4EA@rhm8200> > To: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org > >, <public-owl-comments@w3.org> > Cc: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net>, "KR- > language" <KR-language@YahooGroups.com> > > I skimmed through the OWL2 overview and primer, and > noticed that there is no definition of "Class". > > Since my first exposure to RDF/OWL in 2002, I had difficulty > understanding "Class", because I automatically thought of > "Concept" instead. I finally understand that > > Class is the extension set of Concept. > > Now, all of the "strange" properties of "Class" are obvious, > because "Class" is just a set. > > Specifically, the meaning of subClassOf is subset of, > not species of. > > Dick McCullough > http://mkrmke.org _________________________________________________ Dr. Sebastian Rudolph Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe, D-76128 Karlsruhe rudolph@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de phone +49 (0)721 608 7362 www.sebastian-rudolph.de fax +49 (0)721 608 5998
Received on Tuesday, 12 May 2009 19:42:42 UTC