Re: ACTION Bijan: to work on "closeOver" work-alike with

On Mar 7, 2005, at 4:32 PM, jos.deroo@agfa.com wrote:

> Bijan wrote:
>> On Mar 7, 2005, at 1:47 PM, Kendall Clark wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 10:55:45AM -0500, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>>>
>>>> If the action was to show the feasibility, then it is completed.
>>>
>>> I think I understand what you've done. But my only concerns are
>>>
>>>   1. Jos's case of being able to say that a graph is closed over an
>>>      arbitrary (?) set of rules
>>
>> They just need an URI denoting them as an individual. That could be a
>> member of the class Expressivity.
>
> OK, URI's are fine and what I did last 5 years was using such
> expressivities which can be passed as command line argument
> and have an internal mapping to load appropriate rule sets
>
> else if (el.verb.startsWith(RDF)) return
> "http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdf-rules.n3";
> else if (el.verb.startsWith(RDFS)) return
> "http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules.n3";
> else if (el.verb.startsWith(XSD)) return
> "http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/xsd-rules.n3";
> else if (el.verb.startsWith(OWL)) return
> "http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules.n3";

[snip]

I guess if you consider those to be specifications of expressivity then 
you're fine.

If you really wanted to, you could inline them as a datatypeproperty 
value. There is precedent.
[snip]

> btw Bijan, in
> http://www.mindswap.org/dav/ontologies/bijan/2005/dawg/TestClosedOver
> I was not quite sure what was meant with
>     :RDFSGraph  rdf:rest ();

It looks like a spurious artifact of my editor, to wit, the failure to 
remove a oneOf cleanly.

Fixed.

There are annotations now.

If people use Swoop to view, we can use annotea to discuss :)

Cheers,
Bijan.