Re: proposed resolution of Qualified Restrictions

Jeremy,
...
>
> My understanding is that the qualified ones are in DAML+OIL because they
> were free to implement. i.e. the additional cost of implementing them over
> the unqualified ones was trivial.
>
> I think that they do add real expressiveness to the language.
> The case against them is that even if that expressiveness is free to
> implement, it costs learners, documentors, ontology designers etc.
> Given that the particular expressiveness is close to useless, then a
> cost-benefit analysis suggests it goes.
>

When you say "real expressiveness" vs. "close to useless" expressiveness,
how should I reconcile this? Is there a use case for this
expressiveness/feature so we can better judge its value?

Jonathan