Re: update to the compliance document

• From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
• Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 00:29:05 +0200
• To: Enrico Motta <e.motta@open.ac.uk>
• CC: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@ksl.stanford.edu>, Webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <3CFE90B1.73DA3B63@cs.vu.nl>

Enrico Motta wrote:
> 
> Deborah,
> 
> Just one minor comment.  The document does not explicitly say whether
> subclassOf hierarchies can have cycles (like daml+oil) or not (like
> rdfs).  Because subclassOf properties are listed under Rdfs features,
> one would think that no cycles are allowed, while the presence of
> sameClassAs in the language leads one to think that cycles are OK.

Even RDFS now allows cycles in the class hierarchy.
We might point out in our own document that as a result,
sameClassAs is simply syntactic sugar (but: useful syntactic sugar)
for something that could already be done without it (even in RDF Schema).

Frank.
   ----

Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2002 18:29:42 UTC