W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2005

Re: Formal Semantics of OWL + RDF + SPARQL + SWRL

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 10:23:30 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20051206.102330.43178132.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: adrianw@snet.net
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org

I very much agree that there should be less variability in the SPARQL
specification.

peter


From: Adrian Walker <adrianw@snet.net>
Subject: Formal Semantics of OWL + RDF + SPARQL + SWRL
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 21:10:44 -0500

> Peter --
> 
> A thought about "those were not the results I expected" and SPARQL...
> 
> One of the bad things about the various implementations of classical SQL is 
> that they have divergent semantics -- that is, they can produce different 
> results given the same query and data.
> 
> For combined use of OWL + RDF + SPARQL + SWRL it seems even more important 
> that there should be a simple, accessible model theory (analogous to [1]) 
> that implementers of the combined languages can adhere to with a reasonable 
> amount of effort.  (This is argued in more detail in [2]).
> 
> Does such an animal exist, or is there perhaps work in that direction?
> 
> Thanks in advance for pointers.    -- Adrian
> 
> 
> [1]   Backchain Iteration: Towards a Practical Inference Method that is 
> Simple Enough to be Proved Terminating, Sound and  Complete, A. Walker. 
> Journal of Automated Reasoning, 11:1-22.
> 
> [2]  Understandability and Semantic Interoperability of Diverse Rules Systems
> www.w3.org/2004/12/rules-ws/paper/19
> 
> (With apologies if this note has some html in it.  My email program is a 
> bit independent about outgoing format)
Received on Tuesday, 6 December 2005 15:24:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:08 GMT