RE: Legal to have a recursive definition of a class?

• From: Jon Hanna <jon@spin.ie>
• Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 17:46:18 +0100
• To: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <NDBBLCBLIMDOPKMOPHLHGEJNFCAA.jon@spin.ie>

> <owl:Class rdf:ID="Juicer">
>        <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Appliance"/>
>        <rdfs:subClassOf>
>               <owl:Restriction>
>                       <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#makesObsolete"/>
>                       <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="#Juicer"/>
>              </owl:Restriction>
>       </rdfs:subClassOf>
> </owl:Class>
>
> Note the recursion - Juicer is being used in the definition of Juicer.
> Is this legal?  /Roger

Yes. Not only would I say that this is legal, I would say that it would have
to be legal to serve RDF's purposes - making it illegal would be an
arbitrary restriction on what it can be used to model.

Do you use C++?

Received on Thursday, 22 May 2003 12:46:50 UTC