Re: RE : [mawg] action-249: Ontology rev 5 available & call for competency questions wrt. to actor - role part of the ontology from Pierre-Antoine Champin on 2010-08-26 (public-media-annotation@w3.org from August 2010)

From: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:09:56 +0200
To: "Evain, Jean-Pierre" <evain@ebu.ch>
CC: Tobias Bürger <tobias.buerger@salzburgresearch.at>, "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4C762F64.7090902@liris.cnrs.fr>

On 26/08/2010 11:00, Evain, Jean-Pierre wrote:
> Thanks for clarification.
> 
> I have to look at this and in particular the use of cardinality on
> properties. That looks interesting.

Note also that an equivalent restriction would be

  ma:Image rdfs:subClassOf [
    a owl:Restriction ;
    owl:onProperty ma:duration ;
    owl:allValuesFrom owl:Nothing
  ].

I am not very fond of this pattern, that I find a bit awkward, but I
believe it is acceptable in more OWL dialects than the cardinality
restriction.

  pa

Received on Thursday, 26 August 2010 09:10:33 UTC