- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:45:48 +0100
- To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: <mike.dean@bbn.com>
> > Can this be confirmed i.e. does this mean that there is _effectively_ no > difference between the qualified and unqualified restrictions? No no, that wasn't my point. My understanding is that the qualified ones are in DAML+OIL because they were free to implement. i.e. the additional cost of implementing them over the unqualified ones was trivial. I think that they do add real expressiveness to the language. The case against them is that even if that expressiveness is free to implement, it costs learners, documentors, ontology designers etc. Given that the particular expressiveness is close to useless, then a cost-benefit analysis suggests it goes. Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 09:46:09 UTC