Boris, for my understanding: does it mean that, for OWL RL, a compliant implementation using the rule set would be expected to disallow the usage of BNodes in the rules? At first glance this seems to be fairly restrictive and not really understandable for neither the users nor for implementers; indeed, the rule set seems to be absolutely oblivious to the fact whether some of the resources are BNodes or not. Consequently, I would expect rule based implementers to ignore this restriction. Can you explain the rationale for this? Is it _really_ necessary to disallow BNodes? Ivan Boris Motik wrote: > Hello, > > It turns out that, when we introduced anonymous individuals into OWL 2, we implicitly introduced them into all the profiles as well. > I only noticed this yesterday while creating the complete grammars -- good thing people suggested that I do that! This is clearly an > error, as anonymous individuals increase the complexity of reasoning in some cases. I have corrected this error, but, because it did > involve a small change to the language, I thought that I should at least bring it to everyone's attention. > > Regards, > > Boris > > -- 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 29 November 2008 07:49:50 GMT