- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 15:22:17 +0200
- To: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Peter: > My semantics does not mention owl:Class at all. The only place that > owl:Class shows up in my documents is in the translation from the abstract > syntax to triples. Pat's semantics uses owl:Class as the domain and range > of various OWL properties, as well as for other things. His semantics > could be rewritten to eliminate owl:Class, at some loss in clarity, I > think. If I might rephrase ... The OWL abstract syntax only maps onto a subset of RDF, hence any use of an rdf:Class may or may not be one that can be expressed in the OWL abstract syntax. Those classes that can be expressed in the OWL abstract syntax and those that can't behave significantly differently and hence it adds to clarity to make the distinction explicit. (I am not sure whether I buy this or not, just echoing what I have heard). Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 29 August 2002 09:16:59 UTC