- From: Smith, Kevin, VF-Group <Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 13:33:13 +0100
- To: "Andrea Perego" <andrea.perego@uninsubria.it>, "Public POWDER" <public-powderwg@w3.org>
Hi Andrea, What puzzles me is the need for owl:equivalentClass, and rdfs:subClassOf (without an rdf:resource). My (admittedly poor) understanding was that using equivalentClass you would have: 1 <owl:Class rdf:ID="ResourceOnExampleDotOrg"> 2 <owl:equivalentClass> 3 <owl:Restriction> 4 <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="&wdr;includeHost" /> 5 <owl:hasValue>example.org</owl:hasValue> 6 </owl:Restriction> 7 </owl:equivalentClass> 8 </owl:Class> (ref [1]) ...and that if you used subClassOf you would do something like (note insertion of rdf:ID="AllResources"): 1 <owl:Class rdf:ID="ResourceOnExampleDotOrg"> 4 <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:ID="AllResources"> 5 <owl:Restriction> 6 <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="&wdr;includeHost" /> 7 <owl:hasValue>example.org</owl:hasValue> 8 </owl:Restriction> 9 </rdfs:subClassOf> 12 </owl:Class> (ref [2]) I'm sure your example is correct, I'm just not sure why - please could you help my understanding :) Cheers Kevin [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#equivalentClass1 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#DefiningSimpleClasses -----Original Message----- From: public-powderwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-powderwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Andrea Perego Sent: 05 December 2007 08:36 To: Public POWDER Subject: Open Issues: DR scope I would like again to ask for feedback about an issue which must be urgently solved, that is, how the scope of a DR is defined. The current solution is the following: 1 <owl:Class rdf:ID="ResourceOnExampleDotOrg"> 2 <owl:equivalentClass> 3 <owl:Class> 4 <rdfs:subClassOf> 5 <owl:Restriction> 6 <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="&wdr;includeHost" /> 7 <owl:hasValue>example.org</owl:hasValue> 8 </owl:Restriction> 9 </rdfs:subClassOf> 10 </owl:Class> 11 </owl:equivalentClass> 12 </owl:Class> which literally means "all the resources having a URI host component ending with example.org" (i.e., "all the resources hosted by *.example.org"). So, the question is: does anybody agree that this the correct way to define a DR scope? If it isn't, which are the alternative solutions? Andrea
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2007 12:33:28 UTC