- From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 09:08:53 -0400
- To: "Ian Horrocks" <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, "Enrico Motta" <e.motta@open.ac.uk>
- Cc: "Deborah McGuinness" <dlm@ksl.stanford.edu>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Ian Horrocks wrote: > > I would suggest that where universal quantification is being widely > used in practice, it is either as a result of its being the only > available option and/or the fact that many users assume an implicit > existential - it never occurs to them that people all of whose > children are doctors may not have any children at all (I would hardly > bother telling you what type their children must be if they don't have > any children, would I?). > Hmm. What about combining toClass with minCardinality, so that there would have to be, e.g., at least one child, and that child would have to be a doctor -- or would that just be a minCardinalityQ? Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2002 20:55:27 UTC