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

RE: oneOfDistinct, a proposal for 5.18

From: Smith, Michael K <michael.smith@eds.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 08:39:22 -0600
Message-ID: <B8E84F4D9F65D411803500508BE3221412BC0541@USPLM207>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "Peter F. \"Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Dan,

I'm unclear here.  Explain the illegal syntax?  I can explain AllDistinct
once we figure out how to say it.  Though its getting late to add a lot of
text to the Guide.  I still need to fix the datatype examples.

- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 1:38 PM
To: Peter F. "Patel-Schneider
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: oneOfDistinct, a proposal for 5.18



On Fri, 2002-12-20 at 09:20, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
[...]
> There is an alternative, however, which I think is preferable in some
ways.
> 
> OWL could have something like
> 
> <owl:AllDistinct rdf:parseType="Collection">
>   <owl:Person rdf:about="#John"/>
>   <owl:Person rdf:about="#Susan"/>
> </owl:AllDisjoint>

I realized the other day that this doesn't actually parse.
AllDistinct parses as a typedNode there, not a propertyElement.
parseType goes on propertyElements.

It seems Jos already made the point in his message
of Sat, 21 Dec 2002 20:56:12 +0100

| I just don't see how rdf:parsetype="Collection"
| could work in this case

I don't think that's a show-stopper, but I suggest
the chair confirm that the guide editor can
explain how to use AllDistinc before making a decision
about AllDistinct.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 2 January 2003 09:39:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:56 GMT