RE: OWL FULL or DL?

I don't have to justify myself and give names. I am reporting what I hear from discussions on different reflectors dated yesterday (not browsing all chats).

If people have concerns about the compatibility of OWL FULL, that's enough for me to ring a bell.  I need  more than what you said to reassure me on the choice (although as I inferred in my previous mail some OWL FULL features are attractive).

What would tell me that OWL FULL is well supported? References please...

Jean-Pierre


-----Original Message-----
From: Raphaël Troncy [mailto:raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr] 
Sent: mercredi, 22. septembre 2010 12:02
To: Evain, Jean-Pierre
Cc: 'Yves Raimond'; Tobias Bürger; public-media-annotation@w3.org
Subject: Re: OWL FULL or DL?

> On the other hand, there are voices/concerns about the support of OWL
> FULL by current implementations of OWL APIs.

Old and useless debate.
What are these voices/concerns? References please ...

   Raphaël

-- 
Raphaël Troncy
EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
2229, route des Crêtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France.
e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242
Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/


-----------------------------------------
**************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it 
are confidential and intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. 
If you have received this email in error, 
please notify the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email 
message has been swept by the mailgateway
**************************************************

Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2010 10:11:17 UTC