Re: Response to comments of Enrico

On 27 January 2010 10:10, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> Hey Birte,
>
> I propose to simply send the short paragraph you quoted below:
>
>>
>> For the OWL entailment regimes we do not envisage an encoding into
>> SPARQL queries that are then evaluated under simple entailment
>> semantics. The current working draft includes an OWL Direct Semantics
>> entailment regime that hopefully clarifies this. The working draft
>> does not yet define an entailment regime for OWL RDF-Based Semantics
>> (which is used for the OWL 2 RL profile), but that is envisaged for a
>> future working draft.
>>
>
> Maybe you can also say (it is true, isn't it?) that the RDF-Based
> Semantics entailment is planned to follow the same approach, ie, no
> encoding into SPARQL queries... But you can safely ignore this, too.

Since I say "For the OWL entailment regimes ", I think that is ok.
In general, we do not really care how precisely an implementor
implements the spec (as long as the spec is implementable). Query
rewriting or materialisation of inferences upfront are both workable
although of course incomplete for OWL Full and not really working on
OWL DL input either.

Here's my revised response draft:
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:EF

Birte


>
> Thanks
>
> Ivan
>
>
>
> --
>
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF   : http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> vCard  : http://www.ivan-herman.net/HermanIvan.vcf
>
>



-- 
Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306
Computing Laboratory
Parks Road
Oxford
OX1 3QD
United Kingdom
+44 (0)1865 283529

Received on Wednesday, 27 January 2010 15:42:55 UTC