- From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:42:20 +0000
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 27 January 2010 10:10, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > Hey Birte, > > I propose to simply send the short paragraph you quoted below: > >> >> For the OWL entailment regimes we do not envisage an encoding into >> SPARQL queries that are then evaluated under simple entailment >> semantics. The current working draft includes an OWL Direct Semantics >> entailment regime that hopefully clarifies this. The working draft >> does not yet define an entailment regime for OWL RDF-Based Semantics >> (which is used for the OWL 2 RL profile), but that is envisaged for a >> future working draft. >> > > Maybe you can also say (it is true, isn't it?) that the RDF-Based > Semantics entailment is planned to follow the same approach, ie, no > encoding into SPARQL queries... But you can safely ignore this, too. Since I say "For the OWL entailment regimes ", I think that is ok. In general, we do not really care how precisely an implementor implements the spec (as long as the spec is implementable). Query rewriting or materialisation of inferences upfront are both workable although of course incomplete for OWL Full and not really working on OWL DL input either. Here's my revised response draft: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:EF Birte > > Thanks > > Ivan > > > > -- > > 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 > vCard : http://www.ivan-herman.net/HermanIvan.vcf > > -- Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306 Computing Laboratory Parks Road Oxford OX1 3QD United Kingdom +44 (0)1865 283529
Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 15:42:55 UTC