W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > June 2003

Re: draft response to #owlref-rdfcore-owl-class-denotation

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 17:57:50 -0500
Message-Id: <p05210618bb10065b5785@[]>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

>I wrote:
>>Any attempt to make such a comparison outside the formal framework is
>on reflection I should tone that down ...
>Our agreed consensus is within the formal framework - any understanding
>outside that framework is not part of our consensus, and cannot form part of
>a consensus response to the comment.

We need to recognize (particularly as this is in response to a 
question from the RDF WG concerning part of the RDFS vocabulary) that 
the OWL consensus, if there is such a thing, differs radically from 
the RDFS consensus. That alone seems to me to be sufficient reason to 
not make a syntactic identification of owl:Class and rdfs:Class, and 
still less of owl:Thing with rdfs:Resource, since it is obvious from 
the OWL and RDF specs themselves that in all RDFS interpretations 
there are entities in rdfs:Resource which are not in owl:Thing 
(literal values, for one).


IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 13 June 2003 18:57:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:04:46 UTC