Re: Final text for Basic Graph Patterns

>On Jan 19, 2006, at 2:59 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>
>>>It is also true that the current state of the deployed art, 
>>>suitable for standardization, is conjunctive abox query alone. 
>>>There there is a wealth of theory (see ian's and sergio's and 
>>>enrico's (and others') papers), several reasonably optimized 
>>>implementations (Racer, Pellet, KAON2, with Racer and KAON2 being 
>>>commercial...I guess Cerebra also does conjunctive abox query, and 
>>>it is, of course, commercial, but I'm not very familiar for it). 
>>>Oh, various subsets of OWL DL (e.g., DL Lite) also fit this model. 
>>>It would be nice to standards this level so that we can get 
>>>interoperability between the 4 query implementation. (I imagine 
>>>FaCT++ will have something soon).
>>
>>I'm happy with that as sufficient justification for focussing on 
>>this case, but lets not call it 'OWL-DL', but something like 
>>OWL-Abox. Clearly, this case is not obtained just by doing 
>>"simple"//"OWL-DL" in the SPARQL definitions, with any wording of 
>>those definitions, so there is still some work to do or at least to 
>>check. I don't trust myself to be the judge for exactly how to 
>>couch the definitions to describe this case accurately. Can you do 
>>that?
>
>Sure. FUB can too :)

Yes, of course, I was assuming that. Sorry, what I meant was that its 
best to have extra eyes checking everything (whoever writes the first 
version), but I don't trust myself to be the eagle inspecting this 
particular part, so...

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 19:19:33 UTC