- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 19:05:45 +0100
- To: Piotr Kaminski <piotr@ideanest.com>, www-rdf-comments@w3.org, dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, Guha <guha@alpiri.com>
At 10:41 01/07/2002 -0700, Piotr Kaminski wrote: [...] >I see (at least) 3 possible answers: > >1. That's your problem, not RDFS'. I think that's the answer. RDFS has no notion of meta class. You are building that. > If you put enough constraints on the M2 >metaclasses, any M1 class that tries to be an instance of some unrelated >bunch of them won't be able to have any M0 instances anyway. > >2. You shouldn't use rdfs:subClassOf for subclasses of rdfs:Class. I've done this and found it useful in a real application. The classes I defined were not metaclasses, I just wanted to restrict the range (or domain, I can't remember) to one of a set of classes. >Introduce your own subproperty of it, and restrict it to pairs of matching >metaclasses. > >3. Introduce a rule into RDFS prohibiting the situation above: My take is that this going beyond what RDFS is trying to do. Others may disagree. Danbri, Guha? Brian
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 14:06:58 UTC