From: Dan Connolly (connolly@w3.org)
Date: 05/16/01
Ian Horrocks wrote: > > Dan, > > DAML+OIL can express this already. e.g., [...] nifty! I hadn't thought of it that way. I don't tend to think in terms of cardinality. > Note that I am not commenting on whether or not DAML+OIL needs to > provide this idiom directly. Yeah, that's a slippery slope. These days, I'm largely in favor of providing idioms like this directly; i.e. issuing names for things that we can already express other ways. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST