[sc34wg3] TMCL: 4.4.7 Not DisJoint Constraint

Robert Barta rho at devc.at
Tue Feb 19 08:43:45 EST 2008

On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:56:46PM +0100, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:

> > Firstly, from where is the underlying assumption that types are
> > per-se disjoint?
>  From experience. Pick two types, from any one or two ontologies,  
> which are not in a supertype-subtype relation (directly or  
> indirectly). Will they be distinct? 97% of the time, they will.

Ok, so when someone dedicates a topic as "type", then *automatically*
TMCL will treat them disjoint. Unless said otherwise with

I did not get this from reading TMCL, maybe I just missed it.


More information about the sc34wg3 mailing list