- From: David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 15:13:58 -0400
- To: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@cdepot.net>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, Dieter Köhler <dieter.koehler@philo.de>
At 4:02 AM -0700 2003-05-08, Richard H. McCullough wrote: >The way I see it, every resource is EITHER an individual OR a class. This is because you do not use the term "class" in the same way as RDF. The seeming paradox only arises when you try and make an instance of rdfs:Class correspond to your idea of what a "class" is. Remember: according to the way the terms are used in RDF (and OWL), the set of resources belonging to a class is distinct from the class itself. One can draw a parallel to Java here. Java has an Object class, which all objects are instances of, and a Class class, which all classes are instances of. Class is a subclass of Object, Object is an instance of Class, and Class is an instance of Object. However: Object is NOT a subclass of Class. This is exactly the situation in RDFS: TRUE: rdfs:Class rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Resource . rdfs:Resource rdf:type rdfs:Class . rdfs:Class rdf:type rdf:Resource . UNTRUE: rdfs:Resource rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Class . -- Dave Menendez - zednenem@psualum.com - http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2003 15:13:19 UTC