Bijan Parsia wrote: > Actually, that's not true on several fronts. To mention just a two: 1) > IFDP are decidable, just not particularly implementable in the general > case and 2) the WG decided at the F2F to explore "easy keys" to address > exactly the foaf sort of case: > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1_Minutes#Datatypes > > A fuller presentation of the proposal: > http://code.google.com/p/owl1-1/wiki/EasyKeyProposal > I was particularly pleased to see this. To me this did seem to be a move with near unanimous support from the WG, responding to a need that is regularly voiced within the OWL Full community - moreover, the response seemed to have crossed a few of the DL-ish constraints that Jim seems to be complaining about, and overall the balance of user-need against theoretical considerations seems to be weighing in favour of the user. JeremyReceived on Monday, 17 December 2007 15:21:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:16 GMT