W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > May 2002

Re: LANG: compliance levels

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 09:08:53 -0400
Message-ID: <003201c1f1da$85044a60$0301a8c0@ne.client2.attbi.com>
To: "Ian Horrocks" <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, "Enrico Motta" <e.motta@open.ac.uk>
Cc: "Deborah McGuinness" <dlm@ksl.stanford.edu>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Ian Horrocks wrote:
> I would suggest that where universal quantification is being widely
> used in practice, it is either as a result of its being the only
> available option and/or the fact that many users assume an implicit
> existential - it never occurs to them that people all of whose
> children are doctors may not have any children at all (I would hardly
> bother telling you what type their children must be if they don't have
> any children, would I?).

Hmm. What about combining toClass with minCardinality, so that there would
have to be, e.g., at least one child, and that child would have to be a
doctor -- or would that just be a minCardinalityQ?

Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2002 20:55:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:04:30 UTC