RE: RE : [mawg] action-249: Ontology rev 5 available & call for competency questions wrt. to actor - role part of the ontology

I definitely don't like that one ;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Pierre-Antoine Champin [mailto:pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr] 
Sent: jeudi, 26. août 2010 11:10
To: Evain, Jean-Pierre
Cc: Tobias Bürger; public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Re: RE : [mawg] action-249: Ontology rev 5 available & call for competency questions wrt. to actor - role part of the ontology

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 12:49:23 UTC