Re: Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty

On Wed, 2002-05-29 at 21:42, Jim Hendler wrote:
> Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty
>   Proposal - CLOSE THIS ISSUE
>    The issue here was that the requirements document didn't motivate 
> this language feature.

I think we discovered that's a mistake.

It's called 'Cardinality constraints' in the requirements

I'd support changing the requirements document to say that
we really need maxCardinality 1 (and 2 and 0, maybe),
and lots of others look useful.

>  However, no one has advocated its removal and 
> there does seem to be consensus it is a desirable feature.  It is 
> provided for in DAML+OIL and will be provided in OWL.

Dan Connolly, W3C

Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 10:19:30 UTC