- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:06:00 -0500
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, www-rdf-comments@w3.org, public-webont-comments@w3.org
Pat, this is perhaps a useful perspective on the matter, but what's at issue in this public-webont-comments forum is whether the question is answered by the OWL specs. Please try to answer the question from the text of the specs. If you guys just want to discuss this stuff free-form, please use www-rdf-logic or whatever. On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 21:35, pat hayes wrote: > [...] > >Are all RDF classes OWL classes? > > No. RDFS has a more general notion of class than OWL has. In > particular, rdfs:Class is not an OWL class. > > >and vice-versa? > > Yes. > > >Can this be expressed > >with (rdfs):subClassOf? > > Yes, in RDFS: > > owl:Class rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Class. > > However, this fact is 'invisible' in OWL because of the restrictions > which have been placed on the expressivity of OWL syntax [...] -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2003 23:06:01 UTC