RE: mappings between SWRL and Boley proposal

> > The proposal may not be sufficiently explicit about this,
> > but it states that modeltheoretic satisfaction gives
> > the meaning to conditions.
> 
> Yes, but where is this tied to the mappings?

This has not been made explicit in the proposal. So, 
let's do it. [Harold and Michael, we are waiting for 
your contribution to this.]

It seems clear to me, that if the RIF core has a model-theoretic
semantics in the form of a preferred/intended model operator
Mod assigning a set of intended models to a set of formulas
(as a borderline case, giving you what you prefer, all models 
may be considered intended models), then we want to have that
for any RIF condition formula C

   Mod(C) = Mod'(M[C])

where M is the mapping from RIF to the target language, and
Mod' is the adapted model operator definition working on 
formulas of the target language.

Considering also the inverse mapping N from the target 
language to RIF, we get the additional requirement that

   Mod(C) = Mod(N[M[C]])

which is, however not sufficient to guarantee semantic 
equivalence.

> > The proposal mentions the option of typing terms and 
> predicates/atoms.
> > So, I just made use of this option (in the spirit of the proposal).
> > Of course, you are free to suggest another style of typing...
> 
> How about adding K and A modal operators?

This would be another extension that we could think about,
if we find arguments to justify it.
 
> > >> The extended proposal syntax with optional typing also
> > >> allows a faithful inverse mapping of typed atoms to SWRL.
> > > 
> > > Oh?  Which atoms?  All of them?
> > 
> > Yes all of them (modulo some subtleties concerning restrictions
> > and the generic datatype rdfs:Literal).
> 
> Even predicate applications with 5 arguments?

No, you are right, in some cases, like this one, we may
need to apply special transformation techniques (which
are well-known for this reduction from n-ary to binary),
or we may even have to give up. As I said already, typically, 
mappings will be partial.

-Gerd

Received on Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:19:28 UTC