- From: Simon Cox via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 03:35:10 +0000
- To: public-sdwig@w3.org
@kjano : ordering is already handled by the existing `interval*` relations. I think the philosophy of OWL-Time is to handle ordering explicitly rather than implicitly (e.g. using a list). The gap here is that there is no structure for _aggregates_ of temporal entities. I caught @ashepherd trying to use `time:contains` for aggregation (it is designed to support ordering which is a different thing). That highlighted the gap, which this proposal is aimed to fill. -- GitHub Notification of comment by dr-shorthair Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1140#issuecomment-513516472 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 21 July 2019 03:35:11 UTC