- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 23:54:36 -0500
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, Ian Davis <ian.davis@talis.com>, W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 15:26 -0500, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>
> b. gradual introduction of redundant short terms, followed by
> gradual redaction of longer names. -- good bye cardinality
Exactly. As I've arguing in discussions with you many times over the
years, it was never a good idea to count solutions in SPARQL. It's
always been doomed, if people want to do things like transition
vocabularies.
(I tend to just use the word "cardinality" in the OWL sense -- counting
objects in the domain of discourse, not counting bits of syntax as
SPARQL does -- and in this sense cardinality keeps working just fine.)
-- Sandro
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 04:54:47 UTC