W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2008

Re: General discussion for TC Wednesday 2008-04-21

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:18:30 +0100
Message-Id: <1B03DB98-E16D-4C3E-81E2-B47AFE485E95@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>

On 22 Apr 2008, at 17:03, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
> Thanks Bijan, Uli.
>
> My use case would be satisfied with the simplest of keys - no  
> inferred keys and keys only on named classes.

Then I would suggest that this isn't not something for the current  
spec. When convergence on a preprocessing/macro language emerges, it  
seems like it could easily be handled by that. For now, a fairly  
simple program could handle it.

If we introduce it as a general feature, I think we have to take more  
care to align it to the easykeys behavior so they are reasonably  
consistent.

Obviously, the right sort of DL Safe rule (i.e., one with sparql/owl  
queries in the body) would do the job as well.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 16:16:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 April 2008 16:16:31 GMT