Re: implementation issues with b-node sharing (5.26 DL syntax)

At 20:26 +0000 3/25/03, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>Ian Horrocks wrote:


>and in the proof a note:
>EDITORIAL NOTE: This proof has not yet been updated to reflect
>the entirety of the last issue closed; in particular it does
>not cover the case when multiple identical descriptions in the
>abstract syntax map to the same blank node in an RDF graph.

I would amend that to add "The updated proof will be produced prior 
to moving beyond Last Call."  or words to that effect. 

>Does that look manageable?

If the group can live with this (and I personally am happy to do so) 
I think Jeremy has done what we asked -- produced a fix that members 
of the WG endorse (See Sean and Ian's emails and the TP proposal 
closingissue 5.26 DL Syntax) and that would not keep us from moving 
to LC.   Peter volunteered last week that he thought he could fix the 
proof by mid-April, so getting it done before moving to the next 
stage seems clearly doable.



Professor James Hendler
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)

Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:38:08 UTC