On Aug 12, 2008, at 11:02 AM, Michael Schneider wrote: > Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > >> Is the assumption that in OWL R/Full that the only way in which one >> determine entailments is to forward chain rules and then look in the >> resultant triples for it? > > It's not an "execution semantics". Instead, there has to *exist* a > finite > sequence of rule applications, which leads from the LHS to the RHS > (or an > upper graph of the RHS). OK. I'm then confused by Ian's comment about generating infinite numbers of triples: > Presumably, making axiomatic triples be part of OWL RL (Full) would > mean extending the rule set so that it would generate such triples. > There could be a very large (perhaps even infinite) number of such > triples. This might be a serious burden on implementations and lead > to a significant degradation in performance. > "Entailment" might be not the right term here, because it is > probably more > typically used in the context of model-theoretic semantics. I > prefer to speak about "derivations". We need to figure out and use a common language or make the appropriate language visible in the specification if it is missing. -Alan > >> -Alan > > Cheers, > Michael > > -- > Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider > FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe > Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) > Tel : +49-721-9654-726 > Fax : +49-721-9654-727 > Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de > Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 > > FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe > Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe > Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 > Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts > Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe > Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi > Studer > Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus >Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 15:09:14 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:06 UTC