W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2005

Re: equivalence relation

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:59:49 +0100
Message-Id: <8ebc9969c59b2a81f91248719b4252e8@bblfish.net>
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>

On 9 Feb 2005, at 00:48, Danny Ayers wrote:
>>     :relation owl:equivalentProperty owl:sameAs .
>>
>>> Thanks for pointing out those interesting quirks concerning
>>> complex properties.
>
> Quirk is the word!
>
> I was clearly wrong about putting equivalentClass in the middle -
> x:relation is between individuals, not classes. But using sameAs seems
> to push it beyond what is required, you only need _blank and
> <http://bblfish.net/> to be in the same classes, they don't have to be
> identical. Can that even be expressed with OWL/RDF?
> Heh, nice puzzle...

I don't understand. Why would it have to be that for

_blank ---relationR--> <http://bblfish.net/>
   |------owner-------> "Henry Story"

to entail [1] the graph

<http://bblfish.net> ----owner----> "Henry Story"

_blank and <http://bblfish.net/> only need to be in the
same classes? Is that because you are assuming that elements
of the same class share all the properties of the class? And so
that if blank is in the same class as <http://bblfish.net/> then
they both have the same relation of owner to "Henry Story"?

But I think an element can be part of an infinite number of
classes.

Or is there some other reason I have not understood.

Henry Story

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entailment
Received on Friday, 11 February 2005 10:00:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:44 UTC