Re: Asymmetry of Domain and Range in OWL


> Finally, and importantly, OO subclass is NOT subsumption, which was 
> precisely my point.  It is almost subsumption, but there is this 
> subtle difference. This is what the note needs to make clear.  There 
> is no way, in first-order logic, OWL, or RDF to characterize the 
> notion of "the class used when an object was created".  

Really? Not quite what you are referring to, but OKBC for example had 
this notion of "direct-type", which was exactly  this. and you can 
axiomatize it in FOL, I think, as a class C that it is a type of X such 
that no other subclass of C is also a type of X.

Am I missing something?


Received on Friday, 22 October 2004 21:36:38 UTC