- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:05:35 +0100
- To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "'W3C OWL Working Group'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 13 Aug 2009, at 10:31, Ian Horrocks wrote: > I agree with what Boris says. There are several features that we > excluded from RL on the grounds that they would hamper practical > implementation. I believe that this was one of them. The argument > goes that adding owl:Thing to the profile would require a rule that > adds the relevant type triple for every individual. Of course there > is nothing to prevent RL implementations from dealing correctly with > owl:Thing, but they are not required to do so in order to be > conformant. Plus, frankly, owl:Thing instantiation entailments (or assertions) are silly, given their tautologous nature. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 21:06:35 UTC