- From: Daniel Elenius <elenius@csl.sri.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:41:48 -0800
- To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
Are InputBinding and OutputBinding supposed to be an exhaustive partition of Binding, i.e. are all Binding either InputBinding or OutputBinding? Binding has a toParam property, with Parameter as its range. InputBinding restricts the property value to Input, and OutputBinding restricts it to Output. But Parameter also has subclasses Local and ResultVar. Can we create Bindings for these? I *think* the answer should be no, and we should make this explicit by defining Binding as the union of InputBinding and OutputBinding. Especially since the comment in Process.owl says: "Bindings are used in two ways in this process modeling ontology. They are used to specify how output parameters are specified in different result conditions for Atomic Processes, and they are used to specify how input parameters acquire values when invoked by Perform's in composite process descriptions." I need to know this for the tool we're building. Specifically, when adding data flow (hasDataFrom declarations), should the user only get to choose from Inputs and Outputs (I hope so), or also Locals and ResultVars? Cheers, /Daniel
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 03:41:53 UTC