[doap-interest] On the cardinality of properties

[Damian Steer]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 27 Jan 2005, at 02:49, Jorge Santos wrote:

> What I want to express is: resources which are instances of
> such-and-such class have at least one of such-and-such properties.  I
> understand that RDF Schemas are merely descriptive if that is what you
> meant.

The first thing you said is what the OWL restriction expresses. (Begin 
digression) But what it doesn't say is: if a document is missing a 
property on an instance of some class then that is an error. RDF & OWL 
don't work at the level of documents. This is quite different from XML 
Schema.

> And refering specifically to the DOAP schema, shouldn't the
> cardinality of some properties be specified?

I think they should. Sorry, I'm vigourously agreeing with you :-). I 
feel it's good practice to express required properties in something 
other than prose (such as rdfs:comment).

Damian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFB+MfWAyLCB+mTtykRAlvvAJ9QnkwE8MDPEc34QqlpspahAFMDFwCgrB5H
r4lVI8bv9cASUeps6IEPfRU=
=19kd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----