Re: RDF vocabulary definitions

I'll have to retract what I said.  Pat initially talks only about individuals which belong to an extension, but then he makes a definite switch to say that Classes are allowed in the extension.  I think I was thrown off because I was predisposed to think that only Individuals were allowed.

For me, there is a "what is rdfs:Class" cloud hanging over the paragraph (I'm still talking about first paragraph in section 1.1 of the RDF Semantics document) which hinders my understanding.  Everything is tied together.  If you define rdfs:Class to be a class of names and you replace subsets by proper subsets, I think the Classes completely disappear from the extension.

Well, maybe not.  Considering reification/context, I suppose Classes are back in the picture.

I just plain have trouble building up from a starting point which doesn't make sense to me.  I am referring to the definition of rdfs:Class (whatever that is currently defined to be, which I don't understand) and rdfs:subClassOf (which I understand but don't like because it permits false alternatives).

I am being totally honest with you.  I don't understand & anything I don't understand drives me crazy!
============ 
Dick McCullough 
knowledge := man do identify od existent done
knowledge haspart list of proposition

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brian McBride 
  To: Richard H. McCullough ; Danny Ayers ; www-rdf-interest@w3.org 
  Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 7:31 AM
  Subject: Re: RDF vocabulary definitions


  At 14:14 20/11/2002 -0800, Richard H. McCullough wrote:
  >That paragraph contradicts itself.  It sometimes considers extensions to 
  >consist of individuals only, and sometimes considers extensions to consist 
  >of individuals and classes.

  It would be helpful in figuring out how to improve it if you could be more 
  specific about the conflicting uses.

  Brian