- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:19:13 -0600
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
>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