- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 09:33:26 +0000
- To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Vipul Kashyap <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Dec 3, 2007, at 9:04 AM, Ian Horrocks wrote: > To summarise: This is not allowed in the existing syntax, it would > lead to undecidability if it were allowed, and it is not supported > by implementations. I therefore propose to postpone it on these > grounds. Just to be clear...I could be perhaps persuaded to support such a feature if a clear implementation story were available to me and several people could point to use cases. That is, I'm personally more concerned with implementability (given exisiting tools) than strict implementation. (Obviously, if something is highly implementable, it shouldn't be hard to quickly implement it. So, again, I think the strategy of lobbying for implementation feedback is a good one.) Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Monday, 3 December 2007 09:33:51 UTC