Re: plural properties should become singular

On 1/30/14 1:28 PM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
>> Why not?
>>
>> OWL isn't a bad thing, so please use it where appropriate i.e., in situations where indicating the cardinality of a property actually adds value :-)
> So that's essentially the question I'm asking: does it add value?

Yes it does. But best to use it in situations where utility is utterly 
obvious, as opposed to adding this kind of relation to every property 
description. Thus, it should be used sparingly.

> Earlier on this list, it has been emphasized that Hydra (also) focuses on non-RDF-minded developers.
> However, if this group of people is the largest, then OWL might not make much sense.
The issue isn't "OWL" the issue is having the semantics in the data so 
that said semantics are comprehensible to agents (humans and bots). The 
beauty of RDF is that it lets us have lots of SHOULDs and very few MUSTs.
> But as I wrote before, interesting inferences could be made for Hydra with OWL [1].

Yes, and that should be there for engines with the capacity to reason 
against OWL relation semantics, when encountered.
>
> Best,
>
> Ruben
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra/2013Nov/0056.html
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen