In my 1984 book, I specified conceptual graphs as an extension of EGs
with syntactic sugar for such things. That syntax is *not* in the CL
standard, because CL does not include all that ontology.
Let's assume that we would like to express the above Cyc or OWL
in English as "There is a squid that has exactly 10 tentacles."
In the CG notation of the 1980s, that would be represented as
[Squid]->(HasPart)->[Tentacle: {*}@10].
In English, this can be read "There is a squid that has as parts
exactly 10 tentacles." The notation {*}@10 is defined by an expansion
to a node of type Set, every element of which is of type Tentacle.
The node [Squid] is linked by HasPart to each node of type Tentacle.
But you would not normally do that expansion, except as a step
during some reasoning process.
http://kingsley.idehen.net/describe/?url="">
-- About a Squid .
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen