Re: [poe] Use of cardinality restrictions in the ontology?

@simonstey I agree. But what is needed or missing to achieve that?

I see these basic, more formal needs:

* A consistent formal terminology. Should ODRL follow the RDF terminology and define classes and properties etc? (I support that.)
* What needs to be defined for a class. (e.g. a name and subclass of what other class(es) it is)
* What needs to be defined for a property. (e.g. a name, its domain and range, the cardinality in the domain classes)
* A consistent use of classes vs. properties. E.g. Policy Class defines "A Policy must include the permission and/or prohibition Rule", while in other places "a Policy must include a Permission and/or Prohibition" is told - and people may guess one of that is a typo.


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by nitmws
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/198#issuecomment-309876017 using your GitHub account

Received on Tuesday, 20 June 2017 20:06:58 UTC