[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: semantics in schema (xsd)
Oops, I should have said the "target of the husband relationship could also be male". Kind of long winded ... -----Original Message----- From: Irene Polikoff [mailto:Irene@t...] Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 11:33 AM To: 'Chiusano Joseph' Cc: 'Liam Quin'; 'xml-dev@l...' Subject: RE: semantics in schema (xsd) Well, this seem to go back to the question of whether "husband" should be treated as a class - a subclass of males or as a relationship (object property). In this example husband is treated as a relationship between 2 concepts (classes) - male and female. Are you saying that it would be better to have "husband" as a class? -----Original Message----- From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@b...] Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 11:02 AM To: Irene Polikoff Cc: 'Liam Quin'; xml-dev@l... Subject: Re: semantics in schema (xsd) Irene Polikoff wrote: [snip] > What you are bringing up is that in some countries a husband may be > also a male. Sorry to be picky, but wouldn't this be in all countries (a "husband" is never female)? :) Kind Regards, Joe Chiusano Booz | Allen | Hamilton Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World One way to handle it is to create a subclass of homosexual males > and declare that homosexual males may also have husbands. In addition, > one could put a restriction saying that this is only possible in a > certain subclass of countries (countries that allow homosexual > marriages). > > This is, however, going quite beyond the scope of the original > example. > > Regards, > > Irene > > -----Original Message----- > From: Liam Quin [mailto:liam@w...] > Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 9:46 AM > To: xml-dev@l... > Subject: Re: semantics in schema (xsd) > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 08:52:31AM -0500, Irene Polikoff wrote: > > Yes, modeling wife as a subclass of female may not be the right > > thing to do. Another option in either RDF or OWL is for wife or > > husband to be modeled as a property of male/female. It could then be > > said (using, > > > for example, domain - range restrictions of RDF) that wife's must be > > females and husband's must be males. > > But I am male, and my husband (yes, legally here in Canada) is male. > > When you try to enshrine legislation in software, you have to be > willing to make changes ;-) > > Liam > > -- > Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ > http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|