Hi Martin,
On 4/22/2011 6:18 PM, Martin Hepp wrote:
So our only disagreement seems to be about having the cardinality info in the
label, and I think that, at least for the moment, that is the better choice as
compared to the alternatives.
I really don't understand why you need this cardinality description in a
label of a universal. If a developer should get informed about such
axioms on a term, then a documentation is a good place for this kind of
knowledge.
For example, my SpecGen v6 fork [1,2] transforms such information
directly from an RDF graph into a readable HTML documentation that
includes RDFa as well, i.e., you even can get the full RDF graph out of
an HTML+RDFa serialized specification documentation. A nice showcase
term that illustrates the defined restrictions that are set on this
universal is olo:Slot [3].
Cheers,
Bob
[1]
http://sourceforge.net/projects/smiy/files/SpecGen/v6/specgen6.tar.gz/download
[2] http://smiy.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/smiy/specgen/trunk/ (this
version is up-to-date)
[3] http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#Slot
