W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: A possible way of going forward with OWL-R unification (ISSUE-131)

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:28:22 +0100
Message-Id: <C3260FCA-86C6-4AD4-BF19-EC85ABAA931F@gmail.com>
Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: "Boris Motik" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
On Jul 10, 2008, at 4:20 PM, Boris Motik wrote:

> "The rules from Section 4.3 can be applied to arbitrary RDF graphs,  
> in which case the produced consequences are sound but not
> necessarily complete."

One thing to consider with this last bit, is that there is issue-117  
and discussion at the F2F had leaned towards saying that non- 
entailments in OWL-R would not be sanctioned. Thus "complete" would  
need to be qualified - the entailments might be complete in the sense  
that no others are sanctions, but incomplete with respect to a more  
expressive language.

-Alan
Received on Friday, 11 July 2008 01:29:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:05 UTC