W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > August 2004

Re: [ANN] Working drafts by SW Best Practices group -- request for comments

From: Natasha Noy <noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:19:15 -0700
Message-Id: <C096CB11-E4E2-11D8-B339-000A958B5C28@smi.stanford.edu>
Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
To: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>

>>> :AfricanLion
>>>       a       :Animal;
>>>       rdfs:subClassOf :Lion .
>>> :Animal
>>>       a       owl:Class;
>>>       rdfs:subClassOf :Class .
>> I am not sure what :Class is.
> Sorry, this should be owl:Class. If I am not mistaken this makes the 
> AfricanLion both an individual *and* a class, which would address the 
> issue you outline below.

AfricanLion will also be a subclass of owl:Class, which will mean that 
all its instances are classes. In most applications, this is probably 
not what you want.

>>>   :LionsLifeInThePrideBook
>>>     owl:sameAs <http://isbn.nu/0736809643> ;
>>> rather than
>>>   :LionsLifeInThePrideBook
>>>     rdfs:seeAlso <http://isbn.nu/0736809643> ;
>> I am not sure. I think either solution is correct. I would lean 
>> towards the seeAlso simply because we don't have enough information 
>> to say that the resources are equivalent (by using owl:sameAs)
> I agree that rdfs:seeAlso is always a safe choice, though I would 
> argue that in this particular case we could dare provide additional 
> information by stating that the two resources represent the same 
> thing, rather than simply being related in some unspecified way.

I suppose. Although I don't think it makes a real difference in this 

> Incidently, is it correct to assume that if
>   "x p a" and "y owl:sameAs x" then "y p a" ?

I would assume so, but I'll leave to the OWL gurus.

Received on Monday, 2 August 2004 20:19:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:30:58 UTC