Re: Qualified Cardinality Restrictions

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