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

Re: ISSUE 131 (OWL R Unification): Different semantics on syntactic fragment

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:31:30 -0400
Message-Id: <2F320F98-899B-438F-B524-BA690571595E@gmail.com>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, "OWL 1.1" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, Alan Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
On Aug 14, 2008, at 6:18 PM, Jim Hendler wrote:

>  1 - people will simply ignore the definition and claim  
> conformance, which is bad, or

This is my concern, currently. Or that conformance won't say enough  
to matter for the bulk of cases, which will fall outside the  
syntactic fragment.

Received on Thursday, 14 August 2008 22:32:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:06 UTC