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

Fwd: Fragments

From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:31:46 +0000
Message-Id: <D841FD1A-2CFA-400D-B8B2-223D3ACAD28D@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
To: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

As promised in today's teleconf, here again is the email I sent last  
week with a view to starting a discussion on how to move forward our  
work on fragments.

Ian


Begin forwarded message:

> Resent-From: public-owl-wg@w3.org
> From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
> Date: 22 February 2008 19:41:19 GMT
> To: Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG <public-owl- 
> wg@w3.org>
> Subject: Fragments
>
>
> I want to follow up on Wednesday's telecon discussion, and  
> determine how best to operationalise our (very) provisional  
> decisions on fragments.
>
> What I believe that we need is a new document that defines the  
> (proposed) rec-track fragments. This document should define the  
> syntax of the "scalable schema" (EL++ like) and "scalable data" (DL- 
> Lite like) fragments, and the syntax and semantics of the "rules"  
> fragment (DLP/OWL-Prime like). My understanding is that for the  
> first two we only need syntax restrictions (the semantics are the  
> same as for OWL 1.1 DL) and in the latter case we need syntax  
> restrictions on the DL side (DLP) and a well defined semantics on  
> the RDF side.
>
> Comments?
>
> Ian
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 23:31:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 February 2008 23:32:01 GMT