W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: Objective 4.6 -- additional semantic information

From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:53:38 +0900
To: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: Rob Shearer <Rob.Shearer@networkinference.com>, Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20040611075338.GC15900@w3.org>

On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 09:08:35PM -0400, Kendall Clark wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:59:18PM -0700, Rob Shearer wrote:
> > I must admit that upon re-reading the UC&R doc I am a bit surprised that
> > disjunction has fallen off the radar. I certainly think users like being
> > able to form arbitrary boolean constructions.
> FWIW, I was just thinking this today! Along the lines, "don't we need
> disjunction as an explicit requirement?" I don't know how or why
> disjunction use cases fell out of the doc; maybe this is one of those
> many mistakes I've made, but if so, it was totally unwitting.
> In other words, I think that disjunction should be an explicit
> requirement about disjunction, and I would be happy to help someone
> craft a use case that motivates it.
> > actually getting the benefit of the new system. If features like
> > disjunction are so rarely useful, then I fear a lot of us have wasted a
> > lot of time defining whole new languages like OWL and SWRL for
> > expressing things that are even more esoteric!
> I don't think that's the case at all -- rather, I think that
> disjunction just fell off the map. Let's get it back on.

[1] finds an Annotea use case motivated by eliminating 3 extra queries
(in fact, why I put disjunction into Algae). I provided Algae syntax
and Alberto provided RDQL syntax.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/thread.html#247

office: +1.617.258.5741 NE43-344, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA
cell:   +1.857.222.5741

Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.
Received on Friday, 11 June 2004 03:53:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:27 UTC