- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:37:08 -0500
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Cc: "'Cayzer, Steve'" <Steve.Cayzer@hp.com>, "'NJ Rogers, Learning and Research Technology'" <Nikki.Rogers@bristol.ac.uk>, Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
* Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> [2003-11-10 12:17-0000] > > Backing up a bit, is there a lot of value in having a cardinality > > constraint on soks:descriptor? > > > > <soks:Concept> > > <soks:descriptor xml:lang="en">Bangers and mash > > (cuisine)</soks:descriptor> > > <soks:descriptor xml:lang="fr">Saucisson et pomme de terre > > Anglais</soks:descriptor> > > </soks:Concept> > > > > ...looks good to me. Is it significantly more annoying for > > some classes > > of user, implementation etc? > > > > Dan > > It just means we have to write some guidelines for usage and hope people > stick to them. We can't use something like OWL to formally express the > constraint. Prose is under-estimated :) > Personally, I'm fine with this approach. It's simple and pragmatic. Anyone > think this could be a problem? > > Al. >
Received on Monday, 10 November 2003 07:37:34 UTC