- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:57:29 +0100
- To: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
> RDFS permits one to make statements about classes as instances. > Why would you expect there to be a migration path from RDFS to OWL Lite? > > Is it that the migration you expect is only for certain subsets of RDFS, > and you can't imagine those subsets not including rdfs:seeAlso? > It is clear that certain features of RDF and RDFS are not available in OWL Lite. The ones that I believe there is WG consensus about are: - classes as instances, i.e. for three non-built-in URIrefs <a> <b> <c> you may not have the following three triples: <a> rdf:type <b> . <b> rdf:type <c> . - unrestricted use of blank nodes use of rdf:nodeID in an unrestricted fashion is not allowed in OWL Lite e.g. <a> <b> _:blank . <a> <c> _:blank . is not in OWL Lite. - subproperties and subclasses of builtins. e.g. <a> rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subPropertyOf . is not in OWL Lite - properties taking both Literal and Object values === There are other features of RDF and RDFS that are excluded from the OWL Lite discussed in AS&S that we have not discussed (or not discussed adequately) and for which I do not yet see a WG consensus. e.g. - the prohibition of all use of xml:lang - the prohibition of all use of rdf:parseType="Literal" - the prohibition on using rdfs:label on both classes and instances - the prohibition on using dc:creator on both classes and instances - the prohibition of all use of rdfs:seeAlso, rdfs:isDefinedBy Jeremy
Received on Monday, 27 January 2003 09:02:47 UTC