http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Community%3ARinkeHoekstra_about_PartitionCommunity:RinkeHoekstra about Partition - Revision history2026-04-29T23:54:24ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.25.6http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/index.php?title=Community:RinkeHoekstra_about_Partition&diff=5990&oldid=prevRinkeHoekstra: New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009-10-25 |SubmittedBy=RinkeHoekstra |ContentOPUnderReview=Partition |RevisionID=5901 |Score=0 - needs major revision |ReviewSummary=We...2009-10-25T02:07:39Z<p>New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009-10-25 |SubmittedBy=RinkeHoekstra |ContentOPUnderReview=Partition |RevisionID=5901 |Score=0 - needs major revision |ReviewSummary=We...</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>{{Content OP Proposal Review Template<br />
|CreationDate=2009-10-25<br />
|SubmittedBy=RinkeHoekstra<br />
|ContentOPUnderReview=Partition<br />
|RevisionID=5901<br />
|Score=0 - needs major revision<br />
|ReviewSummary=Well.. what can I say. This pattern again (cf. the pattern for negative property assertions) describes what is already covered by the OWL 2 specification as syntactic sugar. Although I agree that this may be useful for those not willing or able to commit to OWL 2, the pattern should be attributed to the OWL 2 specification, and not the current author of this pattern.<br />
<br />
<br />
}}</div>RinkeHoekstra