[Nml-wg] Grouping relations (Relations in NML)

[Freek Dijkstra]

Roman Łapacz wrote:

>> While updated the UML schema, I noted we are missing a few
>> group-to-element relations:
>>
>>  ????? 
>>  ????? 
>>  ????? 
[...]
>>  ????? 
>>  ????? 
>>
>> Can we use hasPort/hasLink for the 5 missing relations?
>>
>>  hasPort 
>>  hasLink 
> In my opinoin we don't have to use the relation element  for mentioned
> cases. Simple inclusion would be enough.

I should have mentioned: I'm proposing this in the context of RDF, which
does require explicit names.

We indeed agreed on simple inclusion in in XML, and I don't think we
should change that.

So is the above fine in RDF or do we like something else, e.g.
 contains .

Freek