- From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 23:19:00 +0100
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Jonathan Borden wrote: > class ex:baz ( > oneOf( > property ex:a, > property ex:b, > property ex:c > ) > > would not _have been_ immediately obvious to me, lacking further > explanation. > > on the other hand, although you may consider the below, something that bangs > you on the head: > > class ex:baz ( > oneOf( > class ( required property ex:a) > class ( required property ex:b), > class ( required property ex:c) > ) > > may be a bit easier for to uninitiated to understand. i.e. if a property > restriction is being used as a class description, then explicitly label it > as such. Interesting suggestion. > Of course you may rightly consider this syntactic fluff, however, > the main point is that _syntax is critical_ and can successfully make > otherwise complicated concepts usable at a much lower point on the learning > curve. I couldn't agree more. (But I'm not at all sure all of us in the WG do...) Frank. ----
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2002 17:16:10 UTC