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: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:45:31 +0100
Message-ID: <4415858B.5010301@ifi.lmu.de>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
CC: Gerd Wagner <wagnerg@tu-cottbus.de>, public-rif-wg@w3.org

Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> I think the key question is to what extent we want to support 
>>> different
>>> types of semantics for rules with the same syntax.  
>>> Is that really a good thing? 
>> Are you asking if it's really a good thing to support
>> both derivation rules and integrity rules/constraints?
>> (These two types of rules are distinguished both in SQL
>> and in OCL.) 
> My understanding is that derivation rules and integrity constraints are
> just a bifurcation of Horn rules (or sometimes the two halves of
> something beyond Horn).  As such they fit easily into the same
> semantics.
>    - sandro

The above view surely has some ground. But the distinction between
deduction rules and integrity constraints in undoubtedly needed in
practical systems.

I must admit that I do not see the point of refusing such a distinction
in RIF.

Received on Monday, 13 March 2006 14:45:34 UTC

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