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

Re: ISSUE-130 / ACTION-194 Come up with a proposal for conformance

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:34:39 +0200
Message-ID: <48BE926F.1010809@w3.org>
To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
CC: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>


Ian Horrocks wrote:
>>
>> Just for my understanding: what would that require for an
>> implementation? Would it mean that the RDF graph has to be converted
>> into the functional syntax and check against RDF-RL?
> 
> That is how it is *defined*, but tools are free to *implement* it in any
> way they choose -- it might be possible, e.g., to implement checks that
> operate directly on the RDF graph.
> 
> 

Sure, but that would not make it simpler. The huge advantage of the
OWL-RL is that it can be implemented (o.k., with scruffy edges here and
there) in an afternoon on top of an existing RDF environment. Such an
extra 'must' check would make it way more complicated. Hence my
preference of leaving it as a 'may'

Ivan


-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2008 13:35:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:06 UTC