Re: Agenda: RDF Data Access WG 13 Sep

[...]
> 9.    issues#owlDisjunction 
> 10.   note new issue; enumerate known options; initial straw poll 

In 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0414.html
I might have expressed a preference for entailment, but now I would prefer
to keep the "constructive logic" approach as is; this is based on 
implementation
experience from last weekend where we could indeed run such entailment
approach, but then CONSTRUCT result should be something what I posted at 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2005Sep/0010.html
which is not simply a set of triples (is about necessities versus 
possibities).
In our implementation I can still have that FOL behaviour when I 
*explicitly* assert
{WHERE} => {}
but then would just derive inconsistencies i.e. empty set of triples.

-- 
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

Received on Monday, 12 September 2005 20:34:36 UTC