Re: Fragments

Ahh, I thought you were asking for comments on the technical side of  
this, not about how to get the work done.  I suggest we do it as a  
subgroup (task force) as we've done for the user-facing documents - I  
volunteer to be on such a task force and reiterate my offer, made  
since the beginning of the WG, to be one of the editors of the WG  
document(s) on this.
  -Jim H.


On Feb 27, 2008, at 6:31 PM, Ian Horrocks wrote:

>
> As promised in today's teleconf, here again is the email I sent last  
> week with a view to starting a discussion on how to move forward our  
> work on fragments.
>
> Ian
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> Resent-From: public-owl-wg@w3.org
>> From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
>> Date: 22 February 2008 19:41:19 GMT
>> To: Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org 
>> >
>> Subject: Fragments
>>
>>
>> I want to follow up on Wednesday's telecon discussion, and  
>> determine how best to operationalise our (very) provisional  
>> decisions on fragments.
>>
>> What I believe that we need is a new document that defines the  
>> (proposed) rec-track fragments. This document should define the  
>> syntax of the "scalable schema" (EL++ like) and "scalable data" (DL- 
>> Lite like) fragments, and the syntax and semantics of the "rules"  
>> fragment (DLP/OWL-Prime like). My understanding is that for the  
>> first two we only need syntax restrictions (the semantics are the  
>> same as for OWL 1.1 DL) and in the latter case we need syntax  
>> restrictions on the DL side (DLP) and a well defined semantics on  
>> the RDF side.
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>
>

"If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would  
it?." - Albert Einstein

Prof James Hendler				http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler
Tetherless World Constellation Chair
Computer Science Dept
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180

Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 23:55:06 UTC