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

Re: [RIFRAF] questionnaire draft

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 15:05:24 +0100
Message-ID: <44C62524.2020906@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: axel@polleres.net
CC: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Hi Axel,


> I announce the following draft questionnaire for populating RIFRAF with 
> your rule languages:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/38457/RAFQuestionnaire/
> 
> The goal of this questionnaire is to populate RIFRAF on the one hand and 
> also, on the other hand, to [find out new|adjust the existing] 
> discriminators within RIFRAF.
> 
> In the process of generating the questionnaire, I already tewaked the 
> existing discriminators a bit, wherever I found that they could not be 
> mapped into questions.
> 
> The current questionnaire is for comments only! Note that your answers 
> will be lost. Please comment until the next RIF telecon to the structure 
> of the questionnaire.

Generally fine, a few comments:

o No reference to the ability to consume or generate particular data - 
especially RDF and OWL.

o No reference to any ability to "gensym" new objects/skolem constants 
within rules. Not sure if that is important or relevant.

o The RIFRAF terminology used here is fine for working group use but if 
we ever wanted this to be filled in by people outside the working group 
them some further clarification and simplification of some of the 
questions might be worth considering.

o When the questions refer to URLs for more information e.g. 1.2 it 
would nice if those were HTML links.

Minor nits:

1.1.3 suggest dropping this question and have a final "Anything else 
you'd like to tell us" box.

1.5 Drop the mention of RDF/OWL that's not really a "slotted" notation.

2.2 seems to be a duplicate of 2.1

2.3.3 Some more explanation would be handy. How does this notion relate 
to procedural attachment?

2.7 doesn't give an option for the "no labels supported" case.

2.8, 2.9.1 don't give options for the "unsupported" case other than "other"


Typos:

2.1 s/deveral/several/

2.3.2 s/defth/depth/

Cheers,
Dave
Received on Tuesday, 25 July 2006 14:05:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:30 GMT