W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webont-comments@w3.org > May 2003

RE : RE : Remarks on OWL Guide and question about AS&S

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@ina.fr>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 11:51:45 +0200
To: "'Smith, Michael K'" <michael.smith@eds.com>, <public-webont-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001801c3186c$1949fe00$4ff0010a@matisse>

Michael,

That sounds quite nice to me, and I have nothing to add.

Bye,

Antoine

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Smith, Michael K [mailto:michael.smith@eds.com] 
> Envoyé : mercredi 7 mai 2003 17:27
> À : Antoine Isaac; Smith, Michael K; public-webont-comments@w3.org
> Objet : RE: RE : Remarks on OWL Guide and question about AS&S
> 
> 
> Antoine,
> 
> See my suggested rewording at the end of the extract.
> 
> > > > > > -> section 3.4.2
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [
> > > > > > owl:maxCardinality can be used to specify an upper bound.
> > > > > > owl:minCardinality can be used to specify a
> > > lower bound. In
> > > > > > combination, the two can be used to specify a range. ]
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Perhaps a typo : "cardinality" (or 
> "owl:cardinality") instead 
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > "range" ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm using range in the [n...m] sense.  Will change to 
> "numeric 
> > > > > range".
> > > > 
> > > > For my humble brains it stills sound confusing. A numerical
> > > function
> > > > may have something called a "numeric range", but in my 
> opinion it 
> > > > would still be the "owl:range" meaning (even though 
> restrected to 
> > > > a set of numbers). How about using "cardinality range" ?
> > > 
> > > The trouble with 'cardinality range' is that it is a new concept, 
> > > within OWL, that we would need to define somewhere.  I 
> was trying to
> > > reference 
> > > well-understood concepts from outside OWL.  I would propose 
> > > replacing 'range' with 'numeric interval' (thanks to Jeremy 
> > > Carol for this suggestion).
> > 
> > A numeric interval is indeed what is to be used to described an 
> > [n...m] interval, but then it does not make sense any more in the 
> > sentence
> > 
> >  [owl:maxCardinality can be used to specify an upper
> > 	bound. owl:minCardinality can be used to specify a 
> > 	lower bound. In combination, the two can be used to specify a
> *numeric interval*. ]
> > 
> > since we lose the fact that this interval bounds the property 
> > cardinality. I would sugger to add "bounding the property 
> cardinality" 
> > (or a more suitable verb : my english vocabulary is quite loose) at 
> > the end of your rewording.
> 
>   owl:maxCardinality can be used to specify an upper
>   bound. owl:minCardinality can be used to specify a 
>   lower bound. In combination, the two can be used to limit the 
>   property's cardinality to a numeric interval.
> 
> Please reply to the mailing list as to whether the above changes 
> adequately address your comments.
> 
> - Mike
> 
> Michael K. Smith, Ph.D., P.E.
> EDS - Austin Innovation Centre
> 98 San Jacinto, #500
> Austin, TX  78701
> 
> phone: +01-512-404-6683
> email: michael.smith@eds.com
>
Received on Monday, 12 May 2003 05:46:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:28 GMT