I disagree with the premise. There's a substantial difference between not
making support for inferencing mandatory, and not supporting inferencing at

However, the reason for using types is that they're simpler, more efficient
and more understandable than sub properties (as discussed, I think).


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]
> m: +1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Rob Sanderson
Technology Collaboration Facilitator
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305