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

Re: [UCR] RIF needs different reasoning methods

From: Francois Bry <bry@ifi.lmu.de>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:03:09 +0100
Message-ID: <441140CD.9060800@ifi.lmu.de>
To: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>, public-rif-wg@w3.org

Ian Horrocks wrote:
> Given that a particular prover has an adequate response time and
> provides correct answers (as defined by the semantics), then why would
> I care what procedure it uses in order to do its work? Moreover, how
> would I even be able to distinguish what different provers are doing
> if they all give the same answers? They could claim to be using any
> old technique, and I would have no way to tell if it was true or not.
Consider a relational database and views definitions. Assume they are
expressed in a standard logical formalism or the existence of a
interchange format expressing the realtional database and the views in a
format "understood" by a first-order logic theorem prover.

Query-answering against this database and against the views can be
perforemd using the theorem prover. The answers would be the same as
with database query answering methods. The efficiency, however, would
not be the same.

Do you get my point?


Received on Friday, 10 March 2006 09:03:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:37 UTC