Hi Scott, Thank you for your explanation. Just think it would be nice to have some inheritance feature of superclass and subclasses. For example, if we have defined a class as Person with a property 'name', and then when we define Male and Female, we do not have to worry about the general properties as 'name', rather we only worry about their own special properties as: a female would have 'motherOf', and a male would have 'fatherOf' properties.
Mingzhen On Apr 13, 10:08 am, Scott Henninger <[email protected]> wrote: > Mingzhen; This is not a tool issue. The standards for RDFS and OWL > are explicitly designed to *not* perform object-oriented inheritance. > Instead, reasoners can be used to, for example, infer that a member of > a class is also a member of the classes it has a subclass relationship > to. > > Another key issue to understand is that Semantic Web ontologies (hence > RDF/S and OWL standards) are data modeling technologies, not > programming technologies. > > This is all by design by the standards. > -- Scott > > On Apr 13, 9:55 am, mwz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for all responses for discussion. So do we have to assign the > > properties to every class that may apply? But think it in the real > > world. Every subclass should have the properties that its super class > > has; and all instances of a subclass are automatically instances of > > its super class. So the reasoning can infer relations about super > > class, subclass, and instances. And the concept of 'inherit' can come > > and play. The property set for a super class should be a template for > > subclasses to build on. > > > I think protege did that way by my experience. Is there mechanically > > significant differences between TopBraid and Protege in this issue? > > > Thank you very much. > > > Mingzhen > > > On Apr 13, 9:33 am, Scott Henninger <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > RDFS/OWL is *not* an object-oriented model. It is a set theoretic > > > model. A type triple (rdf:type) states that a resource is a member of > > > a set (class). rdfs:subClassOf states that a class is a subset of > > > another. > > > > Properties of classes are not inherited, although properties can be > > > associated with classes by either setting the domain/range of a class > > > (RDFS) or property restrictions on a class (OWL). > > > > -- Scott > > > > On Apr 13, 9:21 am, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > Is this so because the Ontology is not a true-classical OO model? > > > > > Narsim Ganti > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of mwz > > > > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:13 AM > > > > To: TopBraid Composer Users > > > > Subject: [tbc-users] properties assigned to super class > > > > > Hi, Eveyone, > > > > > I found it is interesting that properties assigned to a super class > > > > are not automatically given to its subclasses. I think properties in a > > > > super class works like a template so subclasses should inherit all > > > > properties from the super class. > > > > > Is it true in TopBraid or there is some mistakes I made? Thank you > > > > very much. > > > > > Mingzhen- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Composer Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-composer-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
