RE: owl:Class and owl:Thing

Thanks, Dave, I have thrown out the owl:Thing. Much easier to read for
humans.
Regards,
Hans 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Reynolds [mailto:der@hplb.hpl.hp.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 15:03
To: Hans Teijgeler
Cc: 'SW-forum'
Subject: Re: owl:Class and owl:Thing

Hans Teijgeler wrote:

> Hi Dave,
> 
> Thanks for your response!
> 
> Just to make certain that I understood you well, please confirm that 
> this code is correct:
> 
> 
> 
> In a triple store for a data model with base URI 
> xml:base="http://www.15926.org/dm/2006-02" we find:
> 
>     <owl:Class rdf:ID="ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject"> 
>         <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#ClassOfArrangedIndividual"/> 
>     </owl:Class>
> 
> In a triple store for a vocabulary for core classes with base URI 
> xml:base="http://www.15926.org/rd/2006-02" we find:
> 
> <!--the core class 'Pump'-->
>     <owl:Class rdf:ID="Pump"> 
>         <rdf:type
> rdf:resource="http://www.15926.org/dm/2006-02#ClassOfInanimatePhysical
> Object
> "/> 
>     </owl:Class>

[That is legal OWL/full and does what you say you want. It doesn't explain
why you are modelling InanimatePhysicalObject as a meta-class instead of as
simply being a class of which Pump is a subclass but I'm sure you have good
reasons.]

> <!--the core class 'CentrifugalPump'-->
>     <owl:Class rdf:ID="CentrifugalPump"> 
>         <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Pump"/> 
>     </owl:Class>
> 
> In a triple store of a pump supplier with base URI 
> xml:base="http://www.abc-corp.com/sys4502" we find:
> 
> <!--a pump class in his catalog-->
>     <owl:Class rdf:ID="Model-AK150-CentrifugalPump"> 
>         <rdfs:subClassOf
> rdf:resource="http://www.15926.org/rd/2006-02#CentrifugalPump"/> 
>     </owl:Class>
> 
> <!--a particular pump manufactured by him-->
>     <owl:Thing rdf:ID="PHO-347621">
>         <rdfs:label>pump with serial number AK-83492</rdfs:label>
>         <rdf:type rdf:resource="#Model-AK150-CentrifugalPump"/>
>     </owl:Thing>

Fine, though the owl:Thing bit is redundant. This might be easier to read
as:
    <ns:Model-AK150-CentrifugalPump rdf:ID="PHO-347621">
       <rdfs:label>pump with serial number AK-83492</rdfs:label>
    </ns:Model-AK150-CentrifugalPump>

but there is no semantic differnce between this and your version.

> The class Pump is such a case where it is both an owl:Class and an 
> individual, as a member of the class ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject. 
> Yet it has not been declared as owl:Thing. I understand from you that that
is OK.

Yes.

> Is it possible that owl:Individual, that once existed [1], was meant 
> to be the class of REAL individuals in a REAL world?

I don't think so, perhaps before OWL went to Rec there was a different
mapping from OWL abstract syntax to RDF. Someone from webont would have to
comment on that.

Dave

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.3/298 - Release Date: 30-Mar-06
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.3/298 - Release Date: 30-Mar-06

Received on Friday, 31 March 2006 13:13:31 UTC