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

Re: Importing RIF

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 13:50:17 +0100
Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <62A3732A-4356-445C-A3EE-8E9CE2A6944D@w3.org>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>

On Dec 13, 2010, at 12:40 , Axel Polleres wrote:

>> I understand the RIF WG situation. Ie, the decision to put it into the SPARQL document is procedurally a possibility. The possibility I was wondering abot is that the SPARQL WG put this note as a REC separately and then the entailment document would refer to it.
> 
> Hmm, Sandro's and my idea was rather the other way around, cf.
> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-12-01
> i.e. copy the spec to our SPARQL document and then see whether the RIF-in-RDF [2] doc goes further than a Note (upon which we can't really rely):
> 
> The rationale is:
> - this way doesn't to put us under stress to put the RIF-in-RDF doc forward to Rec (in the light of our tight schedule and other things on our plate, that seems preferable)
> - if I understood Sandro correctly, when the Second Edition for XSD comes out, we will anyways need to do an update/erratum for some RIF documents, including [1], where 
>   we can include a mention of the SPARQL Entailment Regimes document and rif:usedWithProfile.
> 

Just trying to explore this space, not trying to be difficult...

I am not sure I understand, however; I seem to miss something here. How does this relate to RIF-in-RDF? Your small spec does not seem to depend on it, other than referring to that as one possibility (which can be done non-normatively). It refers to RIF-and-RDF which is closed and published. Ie, I do not see the dependency issue.

Ivan


> Axel
> 
> 1. RIF RDF and OWL Compatibility http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/
> 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-in-rdf/
> 
> On 13 Dec 2010, at 05:41, Ivan Herman wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Dec 12, 2010, at 17:18 , Polleres, Axel wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi ivan,
>>> 
>>> This document would be the note by rif, but rif will not bring it to rec anymore. Thus, sandro and I decided to move the definition to the sparql doc, since we can't reference a non-rec document normatively.
>> 
>> I understand the RIF WG situation. Ie, the decision to put it into the SPARQL document is procedurally a possibility. The possibility I was wondering abot is that the SPARQL WG put this note as a REC separately and then the entailment document would refer to it.
>> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Axel
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
>>> To: Polleres, Axel
>>> Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
>>> Sent: Sun Dec 12 11:13:19 2010
>>> Subject: Re: Importing RIF
>>> 
>>> 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
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----
>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 


----
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







Received on Monday, 13 December 2010 12:47:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:44 GMT