- From: Francois Bry <bry@ifi.lmu.de>
- Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:02:49 +0100
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Dear Bijan, > It's declaring their expressive profile? I mean, is it (anything like) > the OWL species? Or the KIF conformance profiles? > <http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/dpans.html#12.3> They don't. > Well, if they give the same answers....isn't everything else just an > implementation detail? Well, one might call 'implementation detail' everything that goes beyond theoretical considerations. In my opinion, the capability to specify different kinds of rules and/or different kind of reasoning is essential for the RIF to be well received in practice. > This doesn't mean it's not worth identifying important fragments and > profiles (though that can be quite the painful game...hard to get right). It is not hard if one considers what business rules in practice are. Regards, Francois
Received on Monday, 6 March 2006 16:02:58 UTC