- From: Riccardo Albertoni via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2022 18:07:15 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
> I think we should also remove the cardinality restrictions: > > * The only cardinality restriction specified in the RDF concerns property `dcat:record` - to be decided whether to keep it or not I would keep this. > * The cardinality 1..* of `dcat:resource` (previously on `dcterms:hasPart`) is controversial (see discussion in https://www.w3.org/2022/02/22-dxwgdcat-minutes#t03), and should probably be revised into 0..* I am ok with changing this. > * Cardinalities as 0..* are the default ones, so they needn't be specified I am afraid without cardinalities some people might read 1 as default instead 0..* I think that the note below the figure explains quite well that cardinalities are not normative, and they are placed to provide usual expectations. Let's discuss this in tonight's call. What is the harm that you see in keeping them? Anyway, If we cancel the cardinalities we need to change the note as well. -- GitHub Notification of comment by riccardoAlbertoni Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/1472#issuecomment-1062060330 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 8 March 2022 18:07:17 UTC