[sc34wg3] New syntax for (binary) associations

[Lars Heuer]

Hi Dmitry,

[...]
> We can define the property "o:work-for" as:

> o:works_for
>      isa Property;
>      tm:subject_role o:Employee @  o:is-employed;
>      tm:object_role o:Employer @  o:is-employed.

BTW, aside from the tm:subject/tm:object thing this goes into the same
direction as Robert's proposal to treat templates and (TMQL) functions
as topics.

At that time I was a big fan of this idea (and I still like the idea),
but you need just too much syntax for such a simple thing like a
template and function.

Having a distinct template / function notation has more advantages
than drawbacks. And nobody forbids to treat templates / functions as
topics even if they use an other syntax.

Best regards,
Lars
-- 
http://www.semagia.com