- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 04:15:46 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> Subject: Re: S&AS: Treatment of imports in RDF-Compatible Semantics Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 03:52:24 -0400 (EDT) > From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu> > Subject: S&AS: Treatment of imports in RDF-Compatible Semantics > Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:48:11 -0400 [...] > Yes, there is an oversight here. I propose, however, to instead use > > Definitions: Let K and Q be imports-closed collections of RDF graphs. > [... as before] > > peter On further reflection, I propose to leave the definition the same, but to add wording to the effect that entailment is best carried out on imports-closed collections, as follows: <p> OWL Full entailment as defined here is not the service that should be provided by OWL tools. Instead, OWL tools should provide a service that first computes the imports closures and then determines whether one imports-closed collection entails the other. </p> peter
Received on Thursday, 22 May 2003 04:15:58 UTC