 |
 |
I disagree with the premise. There's a substantial difference between not making support for inferencing mandatory, and not supporting inferencing at all. However, the reason for using types is that they're simpler, more efficient and more understandable than sub properties (as discussed, I think). Rob On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On 11/10/14 7:21 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote: > >> Yes, precisely. The constraints are a distraction that came in from the >> discussion over whether it was a good idea to *require* inferencing or not. >> > > But you must address the converse: whether you can forbid or ignore the > inferencing inherent in types. In other words, if you aren't supporting > inferencing, why are you using types? > > kc > > -- > Karen Coyle > [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net > m: +1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 > -- Rob Sanderson Technology Collaboration Facilitator Digital Library Systems and Services Stanford, CA 94305