MVF11 — The constraint on vocabulary entry stating that it denotes exactly 1 MVF entry is incorrect

While typically one would associate a vocabulary entry with only one MVF entry, this does not allow for cases when a vocabulary includes more entries than are mapped to MVF entries. Thus, one could have terms that either are not needed or have yet to be mapped, and the restriction would result in wrong results (or a rule that exercises the restriction could do so).

The restriction in the MVF ontology should be modified to 'max 1' from exactly 1, and the redundant restriction in the ISO 1087 ontology that says 'min 0' should be eliminated.

The constraint on vocabulary entry stating that it denotes exactly 1 MVF entry is incorrect

This issue was largely addressed by the resolution to MVF11-18, on which it depends and on MVF11-13 with respect to metadata.

However, it removes a redundant constraint on the class 'vocabulary entry' that was mistakenly added in the ISO 1087 Terms and Definitions ontology.