- From: Christian Halaschek-Wiener <christian@clados.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:14:25 -0700
- To: <public-owl-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <006a01c8c278$9cd57cc0$d6807640$@com>
Greetings, I'm with an investment firm currently using OWL for a variety of purposes internally within our company (some of you know me previously from my time spent in Jim's Mindswap research group at UMD). We're very interested in the work the group is doing on defining tractable subsets/profiles of OWL 2, as performance guarantees are very important for our usage. I recently happened to notice that one of the original member submissions related to tractable fragments [1] included Horn-SHIQ. While being syntactically restricted and having intractable taxonomic complexity, this fragment is interesting to us because it provides modeling constructs not possible with the current profiles defined in [2] (e.g., simultaneous usage of existential quantification, inverse & transitive roles, etc.) and still has tractable data complexity. I was wondering if there were specific reasons why this profile is not currently included in the latest working draft? Thanks for any insight or clarity the group can provide. Cheers, Chris [1] http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-tractable/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/ -- Christian Halaschek-Wiener, Ph.D. Chief Technology Officer Clados Management LLC
Received on Sunday, 1 June 2008 02:03:05 UTC