- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 13:28:23 -0600
- To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>At 11:47 AM 11/8/02 -0600, pat hayes wrote: >>2. Now that subClassOf and subPropertyOf have 'iff' semantics, that >>raises a slight complication: it means that anything with an empty >>class extension, which right now includes anything that isn't a >>class, is a subclass of anything, and similarly for properties. >>That has a lot of unintuitive consequences, and I propose to remove >>them by *defining* classes to be things that are in rdfs:Class, >>similarly properties and rdf:Property, and then restricting the >>'iff' definition of subClassOf to hold only between classes, and >>again similarly for properties. > >Can someone point me at the rationale for having iff rather than if here? Because without the IFF, subClassOf might not be transitive. Similarly subPropertyOf. Peter P-S noticed this a while back. BUt more generally, it seems best to nail down the sub-thingie meanings exactly since they are kind of basic. > >>4. Does everyone agree that rdfs:member rdf:type >>rdfs:ContainerMembershipProperty . ? I can go either way, but this >>will require a small tweak. > >Hmmm... I don't know. Why do we need rdfs:ContainerMembershipProperty at all? I'm not the person to ask. BUt in any case the consensus seems now to be that rdfs:member is not one of them. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Saturday, 9 November 2002 14:28:00 UTC