ISSUE-148: Last Call Comment: Irreflexive and noncyclical hierarchies

ISSUE-148: Last Call Comment: Irreflexive and noncyclical hierarchies

http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/148

Raised by: Alistair Miles
On product: SKOS

Raised by Erik Hennum in [1]:

"""
While it makes good sense to have an abstract base to handle unexpected
cases, the draft acknowledges in Section 8.6.7. Reflexivity of skos:broader
and Section 8.6.8. Cycles in the Hierarchical Relation (Reflexivity of
skos:broaderTransitive) that many applications expect hierarchical
relationships to be irreflexive and noncyclical.

Given that this requirement will be quite common, is it appropriate to
leave it as an exercise for each application to solve in a different way?
Or would it be better to define subproperties with these constraints so
this common requirement can be addressed by common SKOS infrastructure?
"""

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0103.html