Re: [poe] Define Atomic and Compound Constraint as subclasses

If it helps, I would just say that in MPEG-21 Media Contract Ontology, we opted for a very similar approach. Instead of contraints, I suggested speaking in terms of "facts" Consequently, we defined:
:FactIntersection, :FactNegation, :FactUnion. The concept of "atomic constraints" and "compound constraint" was purely implicit.

Union and Intersection had two operands, negation only one.
See informally here: http://vroddon.sdf-eu.org/mco/mco-core/#FactComposition
See also here: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/system/files/swj1218.pdf (Overview of the MPEG-21 Media Contract Ontology). 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by vroddon
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/206#issuecomment-314094893 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 10 July 2017 12:47:06 UTC