Re: subclassing

Makes sense - the original formulation has very logician way of
describing it.. a subclass necessarily can only constrain. But a
requirement can be more abstract and not necessarily feel like a
constraint.

The next paragraph already includes a forward-pointer to the
Motivation section. That will usually satisfy most desires for "simple
subclassing" for marking purposes, e.g. :CommentAnnotation subclass
should not be needed unless it is a community-specific requirement,
like we did in http://purl.org/wf4ever/ro where we made subclasses
ro:SemanticAnnotation as we only wanted to allow annotations with
bodies that are RDF graphs.



On 13 November 2014 22:38, Denenberg, Ray <rden@loc.gov> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 3.1 Annotation
>
> ……..  All Annotations MUST be instances of the class oa:Annotation, and
> additional subclassing is only recommended in order to provide additional,
> community-specific constraints.
>
>
>
> I request that this be changed to:
>
> ……..  All Annotations MUST be instances of the class oa:Annotation; , and
> additional subclassing is only recommended in order to provide address
> additional, community-specific constraints requirements.
>
>
>
> Ray
>
>



-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
http://soiland-reyes.com/stian/work/ http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

Received on Thursday, 13 November 2014 23:56:50 UTC