[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
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@topquadrant.com]
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 11:33 AM
To: 'Chiusano Joseph'
Cc: 'Liam Quin'; 'xml-dev@lists.xml.org'
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] 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@bah.com]
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 11:02 AM
To: Irene Polikoff
Cc: 'Liam Quin'; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] 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@w3.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 9:46 AM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] 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>
|
