Re: Final text for Basic Graph Patterns

On 20 Jan 2006, at 07:28, Bijan Parsia wrote:

>
> On Jan 19, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Enrico Franconi wrote:
>
>>
>> On 19 Jan 2006, at 23:20, Pat Hayes wrote:
>>>> In my text, I am proposing to have an informative statement  
>>>> saying that a safe way to have a working SPARQL with OWL-DL  
>>>> entailment is to restrict the scoping set B to include only  
>>>> URIs, and to have the above syntactic restrictions to the SPARQL  
>>>> BGPs.
>>>
>>> Good idea, provided only that we don't use the official label  
>>> "OWL-DL" for this case which I think would be misleading. How  
>>> about just calling it "simple OWL" or maybe "basic OWL" or some  
>>> such qualification (?)
>>
>> Fair enough.
>
> Ooo, the naming wars :)
>
> How about "OWL DL ABox query", or "OWL DL factual query", or "OWL  
> DL instance query"?

Basic OWL, or OWL factual query, or OWL instance query are all good  
for me. I don't like to introduce the ABox word here.

--e.

Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 06:37:51 UTC