- From: Stefan Decker <stefan@db.stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 13:29:18 -0800
- To: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Hi, >I downloaded it (the earlier release) too and played with making a calendar >schema. >It took me some time to get into it. > >When looking at the first results of my tinkering the first thing I noticed >was >that any subclass of protogé:Thing was declared to be such. So my file >full of my local concepts has a pointer back to stanford as well as pointers >back to the RDFS concepts. > > <rdf:Description rdf:ID="#Calendar"> > <rdf:type >resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-rdf-schema-19990303#Class"/> > <rdfs:subClassOf >rdf:resource="http://smi-web.stanford.edu/projects/protege/pr >otege-rdf/protege-19992012#Thing"/> > <protege:abstractProperty>concrete</protege:abstractProperty> > </rdf:Description> > >(From http://www.w3.org/2000/calendar/clendar.rdfs which is not a serious >effort in any way - just a play with protege and full of junk) > >In fact the fact that from Protogé's point of view something is a subclass >of Thing >is of course information-free. It should therefore be omitted from the >serialization. if an application does not know protege:thing, it can ignore it. If a user defines a resource to be a subclass of protege:Thing, protege can not ignore this and we have to save that. However, i think there is a small missunderstanding: you probably meant that #Calendar is a subclass of rdfs:Resource. Then #Caldendar has to be defined as a subclass of rdfs:Resource, and this if of course also serialized in this way. Stefan
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2000 16:29:23 UTC