Re: rdfs:Class vs. daml:Class ?

I think some clarification of this question would be helpful to others of us as
well.  I was eager to read the Pan and Horrocks paper mentioned below, but the URL
is broken:

Not Found
The requested URL /jpan/Zhilin/download/Paper/Pan-Horrocks-rdfsfa-2001.pdf was not
found on this server.
Apache/1.3.9 Server at imgcs.cs.man.ac.uk Port 80

Can someone please post a working URL for this paper?

Thanks,

David

Steven Gollery wrote:

> Please excuse another naive newby question....
>
> In the DAML language definition, it looks like rdfs and rdf are being
> used as the metamodel: daml:Class, for example, is an instance of
> rdfs:Class. But if that is the case, I would expect that the Class
> definitions in a DAML ontology would be instances of daml:Class.
> Instead, the sample ontologies that I've seen use rdfs:Class either
> exclusively or (as far as I can tell) interchangeably with daml:Class.
>
> I understand from the Pan and Horrocks paper at
> http://img.cs.man.ac.uk/jpan/Zhilin/download/Paper/Pan-Horrocks-rdfsfa-2001.pdf
> that there is a layering problem in the RDF/RDF(S) definition that
> prevents a clean division between successive metamodel levels. Is the
> relationship between rdfs:Class and daml:Class somehow connected to
> this?
>
> I suppose all I'm really asking is: when would I use rdfs:Class and when
> would I use daml:Class? And if it doesn't matter, why are there two of
> them?
>
> Thanks for your patience,
>
> Steven Gollery

Received on Friday, 15 March 2002 15:24:02 UTC