Re: Fragments - specific proposal

Carsten Lutz wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Jim Hendler wrote:
> 
>> 2 - RDFS 3.0
>> I propose we name a subset called RDFS 3.0 which is less than OWL Lite
>> - aimed primarily at universals - i.e. named classes and properties,
>> no restriction statements involved.
>> There should be a version of this which is provably polynomial within
>> certain restrictions (at least no redefinition of the language
>> features, possibly
> 
> Then it would IMHO be appropriate if some of the supporters of RDFS
> 3.0 would state precisely what this tractable fragment is and prove
> that it is tractable. Otherwise, I feel I am discussing a ghost.
>

I think Jim refers to:

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Fragments

which posted some times ago.

Ivan


-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf