- From: ben syverson <w3@likn.org>
- Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:27:43 -0600
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
On Mar 6, 2005, at 7:41 AM, Geoff Chappell wrote: [...] > i.e. becca is a person with green eyes. The value of eyeColor for any > person > must be one of the defined EyeColors (green or brown). Actually, I was shooting simply for: Becca is a person with green and brown eyes (brown in the center, green at the edges, specifically, but lets assume the user doesn't want to get that specific). But this raises an interesting question: I'd like to keep the ontology in a separate file, so that if a constraint on "person" is updated, I don't have to update every person RDF. Is that outsourcing too much information from the main files people will be looking at (the RDFs)? Also, what do I do with a line like: <likn:instanceOf rdf:resource="http://likn.org/#person" /> Is there a way to define through OWL that anything that is a likn:instanceOf is also an owl instance of the target resource's class? And how would I tie the two files together? Or should I be doing this differently? The ontology should be general enough that individuals such as "Becca" don't show up in the ontology file unless they have specific restraints... I'm concerned that rdf:type by itself is too vague. For example: <dc:title>Music Box Theater</dc:title> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://likn.org/#theater" /> Does this imply that the Music Box is a type of theater, when in fact it's an instance of Theater? - ben
Received on Sunday, 6 March 2005 21:27:46 UTC