Re: nominals (was RE: Proposed response to Martin Merry, HP)

>>  I think this is covered by Jim's proposed response. Users should be
>>  aware that nominals are a very powerful construct, and the
>>  (gratuitous) use of nominals is likely to adversely affect
>>  performance.
>Jeremy - if you say something about this in Test, it could be a 
>useful thing.  If you decide to, can you let me know so I can add to 
>the appropriate responses.

I don't think that this sort of comment fits in test.
It would be better in guide perhaps or reference.

Concerning test:

We might find, after we have not had successful implementation reports, that 
tests involving both inverseOf and oneOf need to be moved to the extra credit 
section (or some other device to mark them as too difficult); in which case 
some explanation would need to be offered - but I would hope that would be 
reflected elsewhere.

Concerning the comment:

A different move would be to decide that documents involving both constructs 
are OWL Full, which would be a small substantive change, which might better 
reflect this conversation.


Received on Monday, 12 May 2003 15:35:40 UTC