-
Key: MVF11-15
-
Status: open
-
Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Mrs. Elisa F. Kendall)
-
Summary:
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.
-
Reported: MVF 1.0b2 — Wed, 19 Jun 2024 18:45 GMT
-
Updated: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 18:45 GMT
MVF11 — The constraint on vocabulary entry stating that it denotes exactly 1 MVF entry is incorrect
- Key: MVF11-15
- OMG Task Force: Multiple Vocabulary Facility (MVF) 1.1 RTF