Re: [TF-ENT] Updated doc with D-Entailment, revised Direct Semantics and proofs

Hi Birte,

just a quick reaction to your question below

On 2010-3-19 07:49 , Birte Glimm wrote:
[skip]
> >
> > What is no longer in the Direct Semantics regime is the "combined
> > semantics", which modified OWL 2 Direct Semantics to also take into
> > account non-logical stuff such as annotations. I much prefer not
> > changing the entailment relations from other specs. I can see that
> > users want to query for annotation, but I would prefer to at least
> > have an additional custom regime that is an extension of the Direct
> > Semantics regime. Any opinions? Put it back in? Add an additional
> > extended direct semantics regime? Wait whether we get complaints?
> >
I am in favour of a clean definition, ie, to the fact that you removed
that stuff.

As for what to do: isn't it correct that the same graph, if queried with
simple semantics, could be used to query annotations? We are not 100%
sure yet how the user will switch between different entailment regimes,
but that might be the solution...

Hm... I can see one issue, and that is the import of other ontologies.
Simple entailment will not take care of the import semantics:-( So maybe
the custom regime is simply: simple entailment after the transitive
closure of imports...

At the moment waiting to get complaints might be the good solution:-)

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