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

Re: Style question

From: Jonathan Brinley <jonathanbrinley@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:09:06 -0500
Message-ID: <be816830503061409350f832b@mail.gmail.com>
To: semantic-web@w3.org

Hi, Ben.

> 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).

I think the ability to say this depends on the granularity of the
ontology.  If you just use the property likn:eyeColor, you could say
the following (so long as the ontology allows a person to have more
than one eye color):
<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://likn.org/#becca">
    <likn:eyeColor rdf:resource="http://likn.org/#brown" />
    <likn:eyeColor rdf:resource="http://likn.org/#green" />

One could also make some more specific properties (perhaps by way of
rdfs:subPropertyOf), and say the following:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://likn.org/#becca">
    <likn:eyeCenterColor rdf:resource="http://likn.org/#brown" />
    <likn:eyeEdgeColor rdf:resource="http://likn.org/#green" />

> 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?

I think you may be misinterpreting rdf:type, and I think this
misinterpretation comes from poor naming of the element on the part of
the W3C.  I find it more helpful to think of rdf:type as signifying
the the resource is of the type stated, rather than a type of thing
(which one would denote with rdfs:subClassOf).  In other words, using
rdf:type, you would be saying that the Music Box is an instance of the
class likn:theater, just as you mean to do, it seems.  (I am of the
opinion that rdf:type should have been named rdf:instanceOf, as is
used in some of the earlier drafts.)

Have a nice day,
Jonathan Brinley
Received on Monday, 7 March 2005 01:10:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:44:52 UTC