Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on

From: Frank van Harmelen (Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl)
Date: 08/28/01

Next message: Mike Dean: "Re: Strawman DAML+OIL Query Language Proposal"
Previous message: Mike Dean: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
In reply to: Mike Dean: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
Next in thread: pat hayes: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
Reply: pat hayes: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Pat wrote:

> 1. What reason can there be to forbid subclass loops, other than
> subClassOf being understood to mean proper subclass?

The two issues are not completely tied together it seems to me,
since it would be completely coherent to forbid subclass loops, while still allowing non-proper subclasses (in fact, this is the way I have been reading the RDF Schema spec until now (and many with me)). 

So yes, if you want only proper subclasses, you must forbid loops,
but this would seem to me to be the wrong decision on two counts,
while the position of forbidding loops but allowing non-proper subclasses 
would still be coherent, and be wrong on only one count. 

(no prices for guessing what my favourite position on both these issues would be...)

Frank.
   ----

Next message: Mike Dean: "Re: Strawman DAML+OIL Query Language Proposal"
Previous message: Mike Dean: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
In reply to: Mike Dean: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
Next in thread: pat hayes: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
Reply: pat hayes: "Re: subclass loops, proper subclasses and so on"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST