W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: Final text for Basic Graph Patterns

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:54:40 -0600
Message-Id: <p06230902bff6e205b0a9@[10.100.0.23]>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

>On Jan 19, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Enrico Franconi wrote:
>
>>
>>On 19 Jan 2006, at 23:20, Pat Hayes wrote:
>>>>In my text, I am proposing to have an informative statement 
>>>>saying that a safe way to have a working SPARQL with OWL-DL 
>>>>entailment is to restrict the scoping set B to include only URIs, 
>>>>and to have the above syntactic restrictions to the SPARQL BGPs.
>>>
>>>Good idea, provided only that we don't use the official label 
>>>"OWL-DL" for this case which I think would be misleading. How 
>>>about just calling it "simple OWL" or maybe "basic OWL" or some 
>>>such qualification (?)
>>
>>Fair enough.
>
>Ooo, the naming wars :)
>
>How about "OWL DL ABox query", or "OWL DL factual query", or "OWL DL 
>instance query"?

I like them best in reverse order. "A-box" seems jargony and 
"instance" is more precise than "factual". How about "OWL DL data 
query"? Or is that getting a little too down-to-earth?

Pat


>
>Cheers,
>Bijan.


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 18:54:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:25 GMT