- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:54:40 -0600
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
>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"? I like them best in reverse order. "A-box" seems jargony and "instance" is more precise than "factual". How about "OWL DL data query"? Or is that getting a little too down-to-earth? Pat > >Cheers, >Bijan. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 18:54:59 UTC