Re: Abstract Classes from Eric Jain on 2004-02-12 (www-rdf-logic@w3.org from February 2004)

From: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:53:04 +0100
To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>
Cc: "rdf-logic" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001e01c3f180$4d3b36a0$c300000a@caliente>

> Maybe  you could explain what you are actually trying
> to accomplish here

Given the following class hierarchy:

  <owl:Class rdf:ID="Feature"/>

  <owl:Class rdf:ID="Secondary_Structure_Feature">
    <rdfs:subClassOf>
      <owl:Class rdf:about="#Feature"/>
    </rdfs:subClassOf>
  </owl:Class>

  <owl:Class rdf:ID="Active_Site_Feature">
    <rdfs:subClassOf>
      <owl:Class rdf:about="#Feature"/>
    </rdfs:subClassOf>
  </owl:Class>

I would like to state that there are no instances that are Features but
not also instances of a subclass of a Feature, ever. In OOP this can be
accomplished simply by declaring the base class abstract. Quite possible
that I'm too much caught up in the OOP mindset to see why such a
restriction doesn't make sense from a logical point of view.

Received on Thursday, 12 February 2004 10:53:11 UTC