W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: Review of Service Description Draft

From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 19:13:10 -0400
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BC871962-4C40-41C9-A433-06CD1FF2D45C@evilfunhouse.com>
To: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
On Apr 27, 2011, at 6:37 AM, Birte Glimm wrote:

>> I agree that assigning profiles to graphs seems odd, but assigning a profile to, e.g., ent:OWL-RDF-Based would only be useful if you could guarantee that multiple SD documents aren't loaded into the same store and merging the profiles that are claimed on any particular entailment regime (you'd also obviously need to assume closed world semantics). I have no idea what to do with this. Do you or anyone else with entailment experience have concrete suggestions for how to proceed?
> This seems to be the problematic bit. As I would always have OWL
> Direct Semantics for everthing (supporting the EL, QL, and RL
> profile), I am in an easier situation. The problem kicks in, when you
> sart to mix regimes.
> Maybe the best solution is then to stick with stating also for each
> graph that has a non-standard entailment regime, which profiles are
> supported, e.g., by having (as suggested)
> sd:defaultSupportedEntailmentProfile and sd:supportedEntailmentProfile
> for (named) graphs.

Would having these two properties address your concerns?


Relates an instance of <code>sd:Service</code> with a resource representing a supported profile of the default entailment regime (as declared by <code>sd:defaultEntailmentRegime</code>). Entailment profiles are discussed more in <a href="http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/entailment/xmlspec.xml#OWL2DSProfiles">SPARQL 1.1 Entailment Regimes</a> [<a href="#SPARQLENT">SPARQLENT</a>].


Relates a named graph description with a resource representing a supported profile of the entailment regime (as declared by <code>sd:entailmentRegime</code>) used for basic graph pattern matching over that graph.

>>> I would also like a Turtle example. Maybe you can just use the one I
>>> provided below...
>> Aesthetically, I'd also prefer turtle but I was hesitant to use Turtle over RDF/XML as it's not (yet) an actual standard.
> Maybe in an informative section?

I'll look into this.

Received on Monday, 2 May 2011 23:13:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:04 UTC