- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 17:39:53 -0500
- To: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@cdepot.net>
- CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Richard H. McCullough wrote: > I like to talk about reality. Well, so do I. > > Man subsumes all men, past, present and future. > > Ditto for Animal. > > if Animal rdfs:sameAs Man There isn't any such thing as rdfs:sameAs; that's why I didn't put an rdfs prefix on it in my example. I was using that term to try to describe an aspect of rdfs:subClassOf that we were talking about. > > it means that Animal and Man are identical, > > that Man is an alias of Animal and vice versa. > Yep. > > Now if you're going to tell me that RDFS can't describe reality, > > then I'm not interested in RDFS. RDFS can't describe reality. It can describe some parts of reality, adequately for many useful purposes (as a number of people have found). Richer languages (like OWL) can describe more of reality, and still richer languages can describe even more of reality. But it seems as if we're fated to want to use different language to talk about reality, even the small corner of reality dealing with computer languages for describing (parts of) reality! --Frank -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 17:22:58 UTC