On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 16:44, Roland Schwaenzl wrote:
> > "The class of LCSH headings were issued July 11, 2000", which is not
> > true at all. Thus, Pete correctly notes that we have a case of
> > conflicting semantics here!
>
> There could be many classes, whose class extensions contains things, which have LCSH
> headings as literal values by means of the property, RDF denotes with rdf:value.
>
So a possible interpretation would be "*this* class of LCSH headings was
issued...". If this statement specifically does not extend to the
instances, I guess I can buy it...
Still, in other cases this might not work. There is a difference between
the term and what it denotes.
/Mikael
--
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
|