Re: New release of daml+oil

From: Ian Horrocks (horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: 01/10/01


OK - it was just an idea. I have now put it back.

Ian

On January 10, Stefan Decker writes:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> >Finally, and a little more controversially, I deleted "item" from the
> >list syntax section: we don't use it, and I presume that it isn't our
> >intention to provide a general purpose list implementation. Scream now
> >if you object to this.
> *SCREAM* ;-)
> I would object this. The reason:
> without an item construct one may have to repeat information.
> 
> An example:
> Given the following class definitions:
> 
> <rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Car"/>
> <rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Person"/>
> <rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Plant"/
> 
> Expressing that these classes are disjoint would require
> to repeat either known information (e.g. that these are classes)
> or new information. As in:
> 
> <daml:Disjoint rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
>    <rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Car"/>
>    <rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Person"/>
>    <rdfs:Class rdf:about="#Plant"/>
> </daml:Disjoint>
> 
> An item construct does avoid the repetition of information.
> 
> All the best,
> 
>          Stefan
> 
> >The latest version is in the usual place:
> >
> >     http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/daml+oil
> >
> >I am currently working to update the changes file - I will mail again
> >when that is in place.
> >
> >Ian
> 


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST