W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > April 2003

Re: Qualified Cardinality Restrictions

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 09:02:53 -0400
Message-ID: <087b01c30d86$7e68ec10$b6f5d3ce@L565>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Ian Horrocks" <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>
> Maybe the proposal is that the current (RDF graph) syntax for cardinality
> constraints is dropped and all such restrictions have to be qualified
(e.g.
> to owl:Thing) - this would be monotonic, but a bit of a drag.
>

What has become apparent to me is that, in fact, all such restrictions *can*
be considered qualified when the default qualification is to owl:Thing.
Perhaps we can fix the 'drag' syntactically i.e.:

<owl:UnqualifiedRestriction>
    ... implies a 'default' owl:Thing qualification
which would be identical to:

<owl:QualifiedRestriction>
    <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="owl:Thing" />
...
certainly this can be done in the abstract syntax -> triples mapping.

Is this a big deal?

Jonathan
Received on Monday, 28 April 2003 09:03:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:58 GMT