Re: Treating a class as both an individual and a class?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: <nogievet@cogx.com>
Cc: <costello@mitre.org>; <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: Treating a class as both an individual and a class?


> From: "Nikita Ogievetsky" <nogievet@cogx.com>
> Subject: Re: Treating a class as both an individual and a class?
> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 07:24:08 -0800
>
> > Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> > > No, this is not good modelling.  If you want to say that Davenport has
a
> > > River, you should say so, via
> > >
> > >      <City rdf:ID="Davenport">
> > >          <rdfs:subClassOf>
> > >     <owl:Restriction>
> > > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="hasFeature" />
> > > <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="http://geodesy.org#River"/>
> > >     </owl:Restriction>
> > >          </rdfs:subClassOf>
> > >          ....
> > >      </City>
> > >
> >
> > Hmmm....
> > Peter, in  your example an individual city is a class?
>
> No, Davenport is an instance of the class City.

Sorry, I am missing this: do you agree with me or not?
How can rdfs:subClassOf be used to denote "instance of"
Should not "rdf:Type" be used instead (as I am trying to do bellow)?

> > Should not it be something like:
>
> > <CityOnARiver rdf:ID="Davenport">
> >          ....
> > </CityOnARiver>
> >
> > <owl:Class rdf:ID="CityOnARiver">
> >   <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#River">
> >   <rdfs:subClassOf>
> >     <owl:Restriction>
> >       <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="hasFeature" />
> >       <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="http://geodesy.org#River"/>
> >     </owl:Restriction>
> >   </rdfs:subClassOf>
> > </owl:Class>
>
> This makes a city on a river be a river, which is probably not what is
wanted.

It is a typo, of course: I meant:
<rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Class">

--Nikita.

Received on Monday, 10 March 2003 10:40:45 UTC