Re: PROPOSAL to close issue 4.6 [was Re: SEM: peeking at approach to 4.6 EquivalentTo]

On Mon, 2002-11-04 at 13:54, Jeff Heflin wrote:
> I could live with this, but would be much happier if we also had a
> generic sameAs property that could be used in place of the three longer
> named properties.

Note that this specification gives the generic meaning,
in large owl.

I prefer to call it sameAs too.

I was going to suggest that, since the domain/range isn't
really constrained to Individuals... but in fast OWL,
it is so constrained.

But now that somebody else has spoken up, I concur.

> I know this has come up before. Note, if someone used
> sameAs between a property and a class in OWL/DL, this would be no
> different than if they declared the same ID to be of both type Class and
> Property. 

Good point.

Dan Connolly, W3C

Received on Monday, 4 November 2002 15:02:51 UTC