W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Importing RIF

From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 23:50:21 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTikT77hsYHQ5xL8-5STO3LCAT8wgXPBGJCapSODc@mail.gmail.com>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I just had a look again over the new section and I am mostly happy
with it, just a few minor comments, which I actually fixed, but I
sumarise below (one for the start of the section, which is not new).
Thanks Axel for incorporating the new part it.

Sec. 7:
Other similar RIF entailment relationships can be built for profiles
such as those that have already been defined in this document as
entailment regimes (RDF, RDFS, OWL-DL, etc.).
 -> The entailment regimes are called by the semantics, so for OWL
that would be OWL Direct Semantics or RDF-Based Semantics instead of
OWL DL. OWL DL is more the syntactic restrictions for well-formed RDF
graphs for the Direct Semantics. I changed that, therefore, to "RDF,
RDFS, OWL Direct and RDF-Based Semantics, etc."

We define answers with respect to RDF graphs that are
RIF-Simple-entailed by the combination formed from the (skolemized)
scoping graph and a referenced RIF-Core [RIF-Core] document.
-> I changed it to Skolemized (upper case), as in the rest of the doc
and the RDF spec

I also added the rif namespace with prefix rif to the Namespaces
section, so that we properly say what rif:... is.

I changed Dereferencing RIF documents (non-normative) to Dereferencing
RIF documents (Informative) so that it is consistent with the rest of
the doc. If we in general want to call it non-normative, we can
consistenly change that, but for now it is consistently (Informative).

Let the dataset conist of the single named graph <r1> and the default
graph consist of the two triples...
I changed conist to consist.

Moving it to the end would be ok for me.


On 12 December 2010 22:32, Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org> wrote:
> With Birte's consent, I have now added
> this material in the current entailment regimes draft:
> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/entailment/xmlspec.xml#id0x2213c7d0
> 1)
> I'd like to request review (mainly from Sandro, Birte & Chime at this point) and particularly with respect to the following issues:
>  - sandro: Can you check the RIF-in-RDF encoding of the example ruleset?
>  - Chime: Can you check whether other sections need rewriting (particularly those that had mentioned rif:imports before, so far I only changed rif:imports to
>   rif:usedWithProfile throughout, but didn't really check in detail whether the text around needs to be adapted with regards to the newly introduced section)
>  - Birte: I reworded the non-normative section and added more information on aspects of storing RDF encodings of RIF rulesets in the dataset of an RDF store, including
>   a new example, which should make things clearer. let me know what you think
> (I think this doesn't necessarily need TC time, except assigning ACTIONs in this regard for review.)
> 2)
> Given that the section is quite long now, I'd propose to move it at the end of section 7, i.e. make it 7.4 instead of 7.1... any objections?
> 3)
> One more thing: "non-normative" vs. "informative" what is the preferred terminology? (i've seen both, as far as I remember, but within a document at leaset, we should be consistent)
> best,
> Axel
> On 12 Dec 2010, at 11:13, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Hi Axel,
>> interestingly, a question was posted on the SWIG list on this issue[1] recently...
>> In fact, this begs a procedural question. What you do in this document is to define a new predicate and its semantics. The predicate is in the RIF namespace, I presume the RIF WG is o.k. with that (recalling the mailing list discussions there). However, the mechanism itself, ie, the semantics of rif:usedWithProfile, is not SPARQL specific (see [1] below). I wonder whether it is worth separating this into a distinct document that can be referenced to in general as a Rec in its own right.
>> (B.t.w., I like the design:-)
>> Ivan
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Dec/0098.html
>> On Dec 10, 2010, at 19:38 , Axel Polleres wrote:
>>> Sandro and I have drafted - in coordination with the RIF WG - a section on importing RIF, wiki version at:
>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Importing_RIF
>>> I would also like to discuss this in the course of entailment regimes, this part shall replace the
>>> current Section 7.1 in the entailment regimes document:
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-entailment/#id35811453
>>> I got some comments from Birte already, which were mainly about clarifying some parts, other comments certainly welcome!
>>> This completes ACTION-298, BTW.
>>> best,
>>> Axel
>> ----
>> 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

Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 309
Computing Laboratory
Parks Road
United Kingdom
+44 (0)1865 283520
Received on Sunday, 12 December 2010 23:50:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:02 UTC