Amsterdam f2f Issue ?? (cardinality constructs and levels)

I thought that as I was partly responsible for this being on the issues
I would try to write it up.

regards, stephen

cardinality constructs and levels

The language proposal paper (van Harmelen et al) contains different
cardinality constructs in 'OWL-Lite' (optional/required; single/multivalued)
and in OWL-Full (min-cardinality, max-cardinality).	 In addition,
DAML has a construct 'cardinality'.

At the f2f, there was a proposal to drop 'cardinality' as it can be
in terms of min- and max-. A number of WG members objected to this 
simplicification on grounds of usability. 

Following the level 1/ level 2 features review, and the decision to 
revisit the split, there was a suggestion that _all_ cardinality constructs
should be in level 2.

[the simplification argument above would suggest dropping 
 optional/required and single/multivalued in favour of min- and max-
 if this were the case]

Received on Friday, 12 April 2002 07:37:45 UTC