Thanks Victor. I am personally quite agnostic. OWL 2 is an option but the question is still the same in terms of acceptance and penetration. How do you see this? We can chat over this in Guangzhou in 2 weeks. JP From: Victor Rodriguez Doncel [mailto:victorr@ac.upc.edu] Sent: mercredi, 22. septembre 2010 12:42 To: Evain, Jean-Pierre Cc: 'Raphaël Troncy'; 'Yves Raimond'; Tobias Bürger; public-media-annotation@w3.org Subject: Re: OWL FULL or DL? Will not be OWL 2.0 directly used? Problems could be overcome if the right profile is chosen... Victor Evain, Jean-Pierre escribió: I don't have to justify myself and give names. I am reporting what I hear from discussions on different reflectors dated yesterday (not browsing all chats). If people have concerns about the compatibility of OWL FULL, that's enough for me to ring a bell. I need more than what you said to reassure me on the choice (although as I inferred in my previous mail some OWL FULL features are attractive). What would tell me that OWL FULL is well supported? References please... Jean-Pierre -----Original Message----- From: Raphaël Troncy [mailto:raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr] Sent: mercredi, 22. septembre 2010 12:02 To: Evain, Jean-Pierre Cc: 'Yves Raimond'; Tobias Bürger; public-media-annotation@w3.org<mailto:public-media-annotation@w3.org> Subject: Re: OWL FULL or DL? On the other hand, there are voices/concerns about the support of OWL FULL by current implementations of OWL APIs. Old and useless debate. What are these voices/concerns? References please ... Raphaël
Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2010 11:03:59 UTC