|
Thanks for your comments.
The second part does cover class expressions and such things that set DAML+OIL apart. I don't think it would have been appropriate to cover such things until one had covered the basic extensions DAML makes to RDFS.
The point of the unique property discussion was to show how one can constrain a property to be unique, not necessarily unique *and* unambiguous (i.e. your "identifying property" notion). I'm sorry you found the section confusing.
The article does not state that enumerations should not be extensible. The point was that with conventional approacheds to enums in RDF before DAML+OIL, update of enumerations could be added freely and out of sight, so to speak, of the schema.
The unused extended schema types is indeed a mistake. They are used in the longer example from the second article, and should have been removed from the listing in part 1.
DAML+OIL allows one to use the full machinery for user type definitions allowed in XSDL.
Yes. "usedFor" was inverted.
|
Previous Message
