W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > March 2002

Re: LANG: OWL non-xml syntax

From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 23:19:00 +0100
Message-ID: <3CA0F3D4.6777868D@cs.vu.nl>
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Jonathan Borden wrote:

> class ex:baz (
>         oneOf(
>                     property ex:a,
>                     property ex:b,
>                     property ex:c
>         )
> 
> would not _have been_ immediately obvious to me, lacking further
> explanation.
> 
> on the other hand, although you may consider the below, something that bangs
> you on the head:
> 
> class ex:baz (
>         oneOf(
>                    class ( required property ex:a)
>                    class ( required  property ex:b),
>                    class ( required property ex:c)
>         )
> 
> may be a bit easier for to uninitiated to understand. i.e. if a property
> restriction is being used as a class description, then explicitly label it
> as such. 

Interesting suggestion.

> Of course you may rightly consider this syntactic fluff, however,
> the main point is that _syntax is critical_ and can successfully make
> otherwise complicated concepts usable at a much lower point on the learning
> curve.

I couldn't agree more. (But I'm not at all sure all of us in the WG do...)

Frank.
   ----
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2002 17:16:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:48 GMT