Jon Lang wrote:
> Meanwhile, I've been approaching this with the idea of ensuring that
> OWL DL reasoners will be able to make use of the site. This means
> that SMW has to restrict its semantic capabilities to something that
> can be mapped to OWL DL. In turn, this means maintaining a strict
> s
Jeff: you raise some interesting points. Let me try to address them:
>From what I can tell, SMW is modelling itself after a subset of OWL.
This is being done for compatability reasons: if it's modelled after
OWL, then it should be trivial to export it as OWL, allowing other
applications on the we
Yaron Koren wrote:
> > Conversely, the relationship between an article on Urban Planning and
> > a City category is _not_ an "is-a" relationship: Urban Planning is not
> > a city. But while it's not a valid class/instance relationship, it
> > _is_ a valid category/article relationship.
>
> Well
Jeff Thompson wrote:
> Another example
> of a "class of classes" is Heads of State. For example, President and
> Emperor are
> instances of the class Heads of State. But President itself is *already" a
> class, which
> can have instances like George Washington.
Sorry, I screwed up this examp
Jon Lang wrote:
> Conversely, the relationship between an article on Urban Planning and
> a City category is _not_ an "is-a" relationship: Urban Planning is not
> a city. But while it's not a valid class/instance relationship, it
> _is_ a valid category/article relationship. You've voiced distast
> Conversely, the relationship between an article on Urban Planning and
> a City category is _not_ an "is-a" relationship: Urban Planning is not
> a city. But while it's not a valid class/instance relationship, it
> _is_ a valid category/article relationship.
Well, "valid" is in the eye of the be
Hi,
as French and translator for "SMW_LanguageFr.php", i can tell you
that the term /propriété/ is not a false friend, as suspected.
Kind regards
Pierre Matringe
De : Temlakos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date : 4 mars 2008 14:58:56 HNEC
À : semediawiki-devel@lists.sourcefo
Yaron Koren wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but: your argument against using categories only as
> indicators of "class" (which is still my preferred approach) seems to be
> two-fold: first, that their ease-of-use makes them preferable to using
> semantic properties - in other words, it's
> Indeed I think that there is no active maintainer for Spanish, and your help
> is appreciated (you can send the completed file to me and I will check it
> in). Regarding the choice of words ("atributo" vs. "propiedad") you may do as
> you like. Translations need not be literal (e.g. in German
Hi,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but: your argument against using categories only as
indicators of "class" (which is still my preferred approach) seems to be
two-fold: first, that their ease-of-use makes them preferable to using
semantic properties - in other words, it's a waste of the nice functional
On Dienstag, 4. März 2008, Javier Bezos wrote:
> I've noticed the Spanish strings are only partially translated,
> with obsolete names (eg, atributo instead of propiedad) and with
> many syntactical mistakes. Is it currently maintained? If not, I
> can contribute by translating them.
>
Indeed I th
Markus:
Now that you mention it, the French word in the script file
SMW_LanguageFr.php for "Property" is "Attribut." And yet I suspect that
what the French mean by the word /propriété/ is /something belonging to
another/ and not something that characterizes another--a thing
possessed, not a th
I've noticed the Spanish strings are only partially translated,
with obsolete names (eg, atributo instead of propiedad) and with
many syntactical mistakes. Is it currently maintained? If not, I
can contribute by translating them.
Javier
-
Fundación del Español U
13 matches
Mail list logo
