- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 16:14:12 -0400
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
* pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> [2003-09-08 10:15-0700] > >http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#technote (informative) states, > > > >...ends with: > > "Notice that the question of whether or not a class contains itself as > > a member is quite different from the question of whether or not it is a > > subclass of itself. All classes are subclasses of themselves." > > > >Isn't this last observation a remnant of the old iff/extension version > >of rdfs:subClassOf ? > > Good catch, but we have imposed reflexivitiy of subClassOf, so its still > true. And there was me feeling all clever for a second ;) Can you explain briefly why subClassOf is reflexive now? (just curious, and to leave a papertrail... (apologies if it's in the spec someplace I missed)). cheers, Dan
Received on Monday, 8 September 2003 16:14:12 UTC