- From: Marc Carrion <marc_carrion@yahoo.es>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 14:25:41 -0800 (PST)
- To: Jon Hanna <jon@spin.ie>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
--- Jon Hanna <jon@spin.ie> wrote: > > > thing in all objects that can have color, all > them > > will have the property color, then the domain of > the > > property color is going to be ObjectsWithColor, > but we > > don't want objects that are type of > ObjectsWithColor > > ant not type of anything else. > > Again I think you are confusing "Class" in OO with > "Class" in RDF. I'm sorry, I'm not confusing the both models, I'm saying we would like to have one funcionality in RDF-Schema, that we don't have now > <x> <rdf:type> <ObjectsWithColor> doesn't mean that > <x> is not of any type > other than <ObjectsWithColor>. It is perfectly okay > to have that statement > on its own. I know, I just want to say that I don't want this statement in my model. > Similarly in you're earlier example <#foo> > <rdf:type> <A> entails the > statement <#foo> <rdf:type> <C>. > > Indeed it for any resource #bar one can accurately, > if needlessly compose > the RDF/XML: > > <rdfs:Resource id="#bar"/>, and that's a superclass > even of your <C> class. > > This isn't a programming language. It is a language > for describing > resources. I know, you can use UML to describe models too, it's not a programming language and you can use abstract ideas. > Compare with English. When I say "I am a human > being", that statement isn't > untrue because I didn't use the more accurate "I am > a man" or "I am an > Irishman" or "I am a married Irish Software > Developer between the ages of 25 > to 35 in full-time employment who is registered to > vote and doesn't drive a > car". I know it's not incorrect, but it's useless, I don't want to allow people to say useless information. When you say you are a human being you are also saying you are a man or a woman, that's the info I would like to have. If one day we add clones to the definition of human beings, it's going to be ok to think that when you say you are a human being you mean you are a man or a woman or a clone. > Classes in RDF are far more comparable to nouns in > English than to classes > in OO. > I don't totally agree. If you use RDF correctly you can represent the same that in UML (I think I saw the UML Vocabulary in RDF). Everything depends on the use you want for your RDF data. Regards, Marc ===== ......\|||/................................................ (. .) -oOOo---0---oOOo------- |marc_carrion@yahoo.es| | ooO Ooo | ----( )--( )----------- () () __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 17:25:43 UTC