- From: Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:11:17 +0100 (CET)
- To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Cc: Bernardo Cuenca Grau <bcg@cs.man.ac.uk>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Jim Hendler wrote: > > On Nov 29, 2007, at 2:44, Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote: > >> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Jim Hendler wrote: >>> >>> well, it's not so much motivated by computational properties, see out in >>> the real world there's people who just implement fast engines and don't >>> worry so much about the details... >> >> Sorry to object, but IHMO this approach is precisely why the original >> OWL Lite was broken. And I understood we wanted to fix this?! We should >> at least understand the computational properties of the fragments we >> are selecting. >> > > IMO, its because we worried too much about theory that lite is broken, but > thats neither here nor there. I never said computation wasn't a factor to be > taken into account, but it's also not the only factor to be taken into > account. This I never said. > We are not writing research papers here, we are trying to help > people build real web apps! No doubts, we must have an eye on both. Which is why I pointed out that EL++ is both theoretically well-understood *and* already adopted by many people building real ontologies. :) greetings, Carsten -- * Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU Dresden * * Office phone:++49 351 46339171 mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de *
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2007 17:11:32 UTC