[RDF-OWL] Hitch in embedding RIF-OWL 2 RL

I only just realized that OWL 2 RL does not have the standard OWL 2
semantics, but rather the RDF-based semantics, at least according to the
conformance document [1].  This of course completely horrible, and I
sent a comment about this to the owl-comments list [3]; I hope they will
reconsider.
In the embedding of RIF-OWL 2 RL combinations [2] I was assuming that
OWL 2 RL had the standard OWL 2 direct semantics, and the embedding of
combinations is based on this -- indeed, an embedding of the RDF-based
semantics is not feasible in RIF.
I'm hoping that the OWL people will fix the situation.  In the meantime,
I included a comment saying that it we do not consider the "normative"
RDF-based semantics, but rather the direct semantics for OWL 2 RL.


Best, Jos


[1]
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Conformance_and_Test_Cases#Entailment_Checker
[2]
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC#Embedding_RIF-OWL_2_RL_Combinations
[3]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Feb/0007.html
-- 
Jos de Bruijn            debruijn@inf.unibz.it
+390471016224         http://www.debruijn.net/
----------------------------------------------
No one who cannot rejoice in the discovery of
his own mistakes deserves to be called a
scholar.
  - Donald Foster