- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:33:05 -0400
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: "LYNN,JAMES (HP-USA,ex1)" <james.lynn@hp.com>, public-sw-meaning@w3.org
> >So would it be useful to have, as a convenience, some kind of > >"owl:intensionsl" attribute? > > No, because OWL (unlike RDFS) is entirely based on an extensional > (non-intensional) semantics. So it would be kind of meaningless in > OWL. > > BTW, if this answer makes you feel like tearing your hear out, join the club It doesn't, but that's probably just because I don't understand. :-) Can you explain, maybe with a simple example of something that's very similar but crucially different, using OWL vs RDFS? -- sandro
Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 11:34:26 UTC