- From: Jon Hanna <jon@hackcraft.net>
- Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 15:14:15 +0100
- To: "www-rdf-interest@w3.org" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Quoting Richard Lennox <listserve@richardlennox.net>: > > Hi, > > Is it possible (legal) to create a subClassOf an RDF collection such that > the collection is renamed but equivalent to rdf:bag or rdf:seq. > > eg > > C1 rdfs:subClassOf rdf:seq > C2 rdfs:subClassOf rdf:bag Sure, why not. To make it absolutely equivalent to rdf:Bag then you would want to have the rdfs:subClassOf going in both directions: C1 rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Bag rdf:Bag rdfs:subClassOf C1. > or woud it be possible to create such that one class is the equivalent of > the collection using OWL. C1 owl:sameAs rdf:Bag. > What is the best way of doing this? IMHO, just using rdf:Bag and forgetting about C1. -- Jon Hanna <http://www.hackcraft.net/> "…it has been truly said that hackers have even more words for equipment failures than Yiddish has for obnoxious people." - jargon.txt
Received on Thursday, 6 May 2004 10:14:21 UTC