- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 06:31:13 -0800
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
> > RDF is used to describe resources, right? Bnodes describe resources.
The
> > use of the word 'single' is what we are arguing about. Certainly Bnodes
do
> > not necessarily describe only a *single* object in the domain of our
> > discourse. One Bnode can describe many objects at once. For example:
the
> > following RDF Bnode description, written in N3 with it's corresponding
> > schema (not included), certainly does not describe only one *single*
> > automobile.
> >
> > [rdf:type :Automobile;
> > :has :wheels, :motor; :
> > :manufacturedBy :GM;
> > :modelName "Oldsmobile"]
>
> No, no, no, a thousand times no!!!!
Ok, ok, ok .. I was wrong .. mea copa. So how do we represent the class of
oldsmobiles?
[rdf:type rdfs:Class;
:has :wheels, :motor; :
:manufacturedBy :GM;
:modelName "Oldsmobile"]
But then can we say the following?
[rdfs:subclass rdf:Statement
rdf:subject :S1
rdf:predicate :P1
rdf:object :O1
dc:author :Seth]
If not, why not?
Seth Russell
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2002 09:34:23 UTC