- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:16:04 +0100
- To: Alan Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
- Cc: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 25 Apr 2008, at 17:05, Alan Wu wrote: > Alan, > > Easy keys seems to be very practical. Oracle is likely to implement > this feature. Don't take it as a promise though :) > > Regarding "easiest keys", the counterintuitive case is valid. > However, is that a common case? ;) Do we truly expect > many users define things like that? [snip] I don't think it's such a matter of commonality per se, but what the least surprise would be when that case arises. It's quite easy to imagine this case happening esp. now that we have inline user defined datatypes. The possibility of inducing equalities by totally unrelated changes means that the user is unlikely to *check* when that happens. Such silent changes are very very difficult to debug or even notice. (One example is capturing video data or other event related stuff. You use datatypes to constraint the "moment", but are also using keys to merge data from different cameras. Perhaps you shouldn't do this, but I've seen such scenarios.) If you don't use finite datatypes then everything is fine and we dumb down nicely. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Friday, 25 April 2008 17:14:06 UTC