- From: <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 12:18:45 -0700
- To: Dan Brickley <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>
- cc: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, Dennis van der Laan <LaanD@vertis.nl>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> > >> rdfs:ConstraintProperty is the only class that is a subclass of > > >> two other classes. Why? > > > > To me it looks like an oddity in the rdf class hierarchy and is the > > only part that means RDF schema implementations have to support > > multiple inheritance. Maybe this is required anyway but it isn't > > explicitly described. > > > > If it is so clear to you Dennis, why don't you explain it? > > "Multiple inheritance" in RDF is in large part forced on us by having a > flat space of identifiers (or identifiable objects). OK, here's a question I seem to have to ask very frequently, but to which I never seem to get a useful answer. What on Earth is wrong with multiple inheritance? It seems that ever since Java came out crowing for some odd reason that it had "fixed" C++'s use of MI, the orthodoxy has become that multiple inheritance is bad, but I think this is nonsense. Certainly in RDF it makes the most eminent sense. Inheritance is a simple arc, and I don't see how the cardinality of that particular arc hampers the quality of the expression or implementation in any way. -- Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com +1 303 583 9900 x 101 Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com 4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python
Received on Thursday, 18 January 2001 14:18:56 UTC