(This is a peripherally related to ISSUE-131, and is a response to its opening, but is really about ISSUE-111.) > It might be beneficial to try and unify OWL-R DL and OWL-R Full into a > single profile. The main benefit would be that we would not need > owl:intendedProfile: the profile an ontology is in would be defined by > the syntactic structure of the axioms in the ontology. Even for OWL-Full? To be clear: in OWL 1, test cases are parameterized by the intended profile. The entailments of an OWL document are not defined unless you have that parameter in hand. I think we're agreed that this is bad. You're saying that aside from the split between OWL-R DL and OWL-R Full, OWL 2 doesn't have this split? Whether one RDF Graph owl2-entails another or is owl2-consistent is fully defined for every RDF Graph? -- SandroReceived on Tuesday, 24 June 2008 19:43:29 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:41:48 UTC