From: Jim Hendler ([email protected])
Date: 03/22/01
I guess I would suggest looking at the usage of equivalento -- and
particularly I would want Jeff Heflin to weigh in on this issue
because he uses it extensively in his ontologies, which are currently
among the most used in the DAML repository. He does a lot of this
sort of thing
(from http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/plus/DAML/onts/personal1.0.daml
><Property ID="addressCity">
> <equivalentTo
>resource="http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/plus/DAML/onts/general1.0.dam
>l#addressCity" />
></Property>
>
><Property ID="emailAddress">
> <equivalentTo
>resource="http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/plus/DAML/onts/general1.0.dam
>l#emailAddress" />
></Property>
which lets him create new ontologies that explicitly refer to old
ones and then extend them. This has been useful in usage of SHOE.
Jeff, perhaps you can comment on this issue.
Also, although I shudder to mention this, on rdfig (see
http://rdfig.xmlhack.com) the term from DAML they're all most
interested in is "equivalentTO" precisely because it maps to its
English equivalent so well. I suspect we should just keep things the
way they are -- The semantics of equivalentto can be defined such
that making things of different category (i.e. class, property,
individual, etc.) equivalentto is not allowed (I.e. if I say
damloil:equivalentTO #pfps daml:person) the DAML+OIL validator should
come back and complain (bitterly)
-JH
Dr. James Hendler [email protected]
Chief Scientist, DARPA/ISO 703-696-2238 (phone)
3701 N. Fairfax Dr. 703-696-2201 (Fax)
Arlington, VA 22203 http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST