W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > December 2006

Re: [TED] Action-188, ISSUE: production rule systems have "difficulty" with recursive rules in RIF Core

From: Francis McCabe <frankmccabe@sandsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 07:06:01 -0800
Message-Id: <2335CA5D-294B-4C9D-887C-254FFB4FDEE8@sandsoft.com>
Cc: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, W3C RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
To: Paul Vincent <pvincent@tibco.com>

Paul:
  I think it is more subtle than that. It is really about what  
conformance means.
Frank

On Dec 18, 2006, at 6:57 AM, Paul Vincent wrote:

>
> It seems most of the disagreements on this topic could be solved  
> simply by renaming "RIF CORE" to "RIF Horn", and reconsidering the  
> role of CORE vs other dialects once Phase 1 is complete.
>
> Note that the charter (http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/ 
> charter#horn) does not state that RIF CORE (http://www.w3.org/2005/ 
> rules/wg/wiki/CORE) shall be Horn, just that this is the 1st target  
> language. I forget where the WG decided that CORE = the Horn  
> dialect, rather than CORE "is based on" Horn, but it may have been  
> the last F2F.
>
> At the very least, it seems we need to separate RIF CORE and RIF  
> Horn for the time being.
>
> Paul Vincent
> TIBCO - ETG/Business Rules
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg- 
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael Kifer
> Sent: 18 December 2006 14:03
> To: Sandro Hawke
> Cc: Francis McCabe; W3C RIF WG
> Subject: Re: [TED] Action-188, ISSUE: production rule systems have  
> "difficulty" with recursive rules in RIF Core
>
>
>
>>> Yes, but the purpose of the RIF is to support the interchange of any
>>> rule language. Conformance must be expressed in terms of being
>>> faithful to the semantics of RIF, not whether you implement
>>> everything in it. If you are faithful to the semantics, then someone
>>> else can come along and reliably interpret your translated rule set.
>>
>> How do you suggest that I -- a user -- know what rules I can write  
>> and
>> remain confident they will work on several other vendors' systems?
>>
>>      -- Sandro
>
>
> My suggestion would be to give up this unrealistic goal.
> Any rule set that meets this criterion (remember that you said that  
> you
> don't want to change any of the rule systems) is not worth writing.
>
>
> 	--michael
>
>
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 15:06:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:34 GMT