Re: UFDTF Metamodeling Document

On Nov 30, 2007, at 4:37 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
>> Agreed, however does it make sense for there to be a storage
>> mechanism for OWL specifically, rather than building on whatever
>> storage mechanism is chosen for RDF?
>>
>> -Alan
> Absolutely.  Tools need to be able to store OWL axioms and facts as
> entities different from RDF triples.  In fact, building an OWL
> structural specification on top of an RDF storage methodology is
> probably the wrong thing to do.

Because...

-Alan