- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 11:20:45 -0700
- To: "graham wideman" <graham@wideman-one.com>, "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: "Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>, "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
From: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
> A is a subclass of B just when every member of A is a member of B.
> That's all there is to it: there is no inheritance or 'transferring'
> between the classes. This isn't OOP.
Can't I write:
<B> my:haveQuality <E>.
<A> rdfs:subclassOf <B>.
<x> rdf:type <A>.
and mean that:
<x> my:haveQuality <E>.
??
Now I do understand that the RDF MT does not sanction that entailment. But
does it prevent me from meaning that entailment when I write the triple {B
my:haveQuality D} ? Here the 'my' is a prefix bound to *my own namespace*.
Seth Russell
http://robustai.net/sailor/
Received on Monday, 26 August 2002 14:21:20 UTC