You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In case of vectors, length, data range and value restriction might be a bit more complicated. But I think this is not a huge priority to be implemented since we are ontologizing in the EMMO-way, without any vectors as data properties.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As a follow-up of #821, I was also asked for the functionality to check the actual values of the Cuds.
For my opion this makes absolutely sense if you want to write a unittest for your function which is generating Cuds with actual data.
However, my suggestion would be that this might also overwrite the cardinality with a value-keyword in the case of data properties:
Restriction to length
Following a similar pattern as the cardinality, this value might e.g. in case of a string restrict the length (see example above) or the actual value:
Restriction of value
In the case of floats, bools and ints, there is no restriction of the length needed, but rather a statement towards the data range:
Restriction of range
... or the actual value:
Restriction of value
In case of vectors, length, data range and value restriction might be a bit more complicated. But I think this is not a huge priority to be implemented since we are ontologizing in the EMMO-way, without any vectors as data properties.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: