From: Dan Connolly (connolly@w3.org)
Date: 03/21/01
"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote: > > Hi: > > As I was going through the reference document last night, I again > encountered the issue of equivalentTo. > > equivalentTo has been used to make two things the same. However, there are > several subrelationships of equivalentTo, including sameClassAs and > samePropertyAs. These two subrelationships then have no interesting extra > meaning, as once two things are the same, they can't be made any samer. > > So my suggestion is to do away with equivalentTo. > > Comments? I'm currently using equivalentTo for a number of things, so it wouldn't be painless for me if we did away with it. On the other hand, I haven't tried hard to live without it. I don't think I have a compelling argument for keeping it just now; this message is just a signal so that you don't take silence from me as agreement that we should remove it. I suspect that JimH might be right when he says that equivalentTo might be one of the most significant contribution DAML makes to the Semantic Web (in the 2000-10 thru 2001-03 drafts, anyway). But I can't back that intuition up with heaps of evidence yet. The motivation for samePropertyAs and its ilk had to do with helping out agents that only knew RDFS 1.0; but there are a bunch of details that I'm not sure we got quite right. I'd like to do some hacking to check. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ office: tel:+1-913-491-0501 pager: mailto:connolly.pager@w3.org (put return phone number in from/subject)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST