At 8:46 PM +0300 5/2/02, Ziv Hellman wrote: >I was recently looking through some DAML+OIL documentation and I noticed >that in order to, for example, constrain the property 'age' of a class >Adult to being 17 or over, one needs the following syntax. [snip] >If stating of a property that it has values between 3 and 25, or 3.14159 >and 24.996436, requires each time referencing a separate URI -- so in >full generality there might be an uncountable(!) cardinality of URIs -- >and every time a user wishes to edit a range restriction this again >requires locating the correct URI or creating one, it seems positively >mind boggling. And this is only with reference to the simplest of value >restrictions with respect to ranges -- how extensible would this be to >more complicated constraints and business-rules? > >Will OWL inherit this type of behaviout from DAML+OIL? Ziv - might I suggest you write an issue statement and send it to Mike Smith - this is exactly the sort of mail that should be accompanied by an issue request -- see http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#issueSubmission for a reminder on how to do this -JH -- Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland College Park, MD 20742 http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendlerReceived on Thursday, 2 May 2002 19:40:53 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 03:38:30 GMT