- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:21:42 -0500
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
- Cc: pfps@research.bell-labs.com
Ah, it occurs to me that one of the bugs that Peter may have been referring to is my use of rdfs:range and rdfs:domain. Peter apparently believes that the RDFS semantics for these are wrong and need correcting. However, I disagree, and do not propose to alter them in the RDFS MT. If OWL needs to use different notions then OWL should introduce and use owl:domain and owl:range rather than use the RDFS vocabulary. I would however suggest that the adoption of a different mechanism at such a basic level might be a decision which should be examined very carefully, as it has many repercussions (eg for datatyping mechanisms). I havn't seen any good arguments for it, which is why I simply used the RDFS notions in the document. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 23 September 2002 00:21:36 UTC