- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 21:54:07 +0200
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
[...] > > This is using an RDF/N3 presentation syntax > > but the RDF/XML resources are there as well > > (I hope with not too many bugs, as I > > had to do the RDF list stuff by hand > > instead of using CWM's N3-to-RDF) > > Now wait just a minute here. Are you actually suggesting that OWL tests > use N3 or log:entails? If so, I protest in the strongest terms. I am > *not* willing to have any OWL tests be written in a system that has neither > syntax nor semantics, like N3. Neither am i willing to have any OWL tests > written using connectives that do not have a semantics, like log:entails. P log:entails C means that P U ~C is unsatisfiable P is designated as a list of RDF graph URI's and namespace entailment URI's C is designated as a single RDF graph URI N3 syntax is used for those designations IS ALL -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Sunday, 30 June 2002 01:38:00 UTC