W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Entailment Regimes Task Force

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 09:12:47 +0200
Message-ID: <4A753C6F.3060506@w3.org>
To: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>


Birte Glimm wrote:
> Ivan,
> I used that name because that is the name that was used for the
> feature all the time since I joined the WG. That is what the feature
> was named in the initial voting about which features the group would
> work on and during the F2F. 

You are probably right, and, at least in my view, this was an
unfortunate terminological shorthand:-( But, at least as far as I am
concerned, the user base of entailement+SPARQL has a wider interest than
just OWL. For a large user community RDFS is what they use and we can at
least hope that RIF (or some dialect thereof) will also come to the
fore. By the way, the Features document clearly refers to all these[1]
(and so does the charter that is being voted upon[2]).

That being said, I do not expect that to be a huge extra work. I think
we all agree that something ought to be said about OWL RL, and the rule
set defining OWL RL for RDF based semantics[3] largely subsumes RDFS.
Ie, whatever we say about the OWL RL ruleset should be easily adaptable
to RDFS. I am less certain about RIF, but I would expect to define some
sort of a deductive closure for RIF when acting on RDF data, too, and
that would probably form the basis of what we would like to see in
SPARQL. But Axel knows much more about that than I do...

>                                I agree that it might not be a well-chosen
> name, so do you suggest we start the TF with a discussion about what
> name we use?

'Entailement'?

Cheers

Ivan


> Birte
> 

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-features/#Entailment
[2] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/sparql-phase-II-charter.html#scope


> 
> 2009/8/1 Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>:
>> Great, thanks!
>>
>> One immediate comment, though: the entry for the time-permitting
>> features is not only OWL. It also includes RDFS inference and possibly
>> looking at RIF rules. Would it be possible to rename the page to avoid
>> any misunderstandings?
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>> Birte Glimm wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> following Andy's example, I have created a wiki page for the SPARQL/OWL TF:
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TaskForce:SPARQLOWL
>>>
>>> also in Category:TaskForce
>>>
>>> The list of names from WG telecon (2009-07-28) is there. Please add
>>> yourself if you want to participate and are not yet on the list.
>>> Could I also ask interested people to note their availability for a
>>> generally good slot in the week where we could meet when needed.
>>>
>>> Birte
>>>
>> --
>>
>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>> mobile: +31-641044153
>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Sunday, 2 August 2009 07:13:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:39 GMT