- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:56:59 -0600
- To: Arjohn Kampman <arjohn.kampman@aidministrator.nl>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>herman.ter.horst@philips.com wrote: > >>[1] http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes/RDF%20Model%20Theory_Oct_draft.html > > >The reflexivity rules for rdfs:subClassOf and rdfs:subPropertyOf still >seem to be missing. We've already indicated this twice and have received >replies on this that they will be added to 'the next release'. Have >these been forgotten Yes, they were forgotten. Sorry, and thanks for noticing. I will include them. The reflexivity rules are obviously valid. >, or are there good reasons to not include them in >the RDF MT? > >See: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JanMar/0063.html > >and: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0003.html >and it's follow-ups. However, the MT does not, and will not, have the 'uml'-style restriction on subclasses of meta-classes asked for in the above message. The rule 'rdfs 11' proposed there is not RDFS-valid. Best wishes Pat Hayes -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Monday, 11 November 2002 13:56:32 UTC