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

Re: A proposal for a unitary RIF phase 1

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 03:25:58 -0400
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@inf.unibz.it>
Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <30786.1148801158@kiferserv.kiferhome.com>

> From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
> Subject: Re: A proposal for a unitary RIF phase 1 
> Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 19:34:17 -0400
> > Peter,
> > 
> > It is no big deal to be unitary by restricting the language to Datalog.
> > You don't even need to limit it to a function-free sublanguage. In our
> > roadmap the language was unitary also up to this point.
> OK.
> > The issue is how to build such a system in an extensible way so that it
> > could be extended to satisfy most of the RIF requirements.
> Well, this is at least one of issues.  However, I don't see any particular
> preference for divergent semantics here.

I am not sure if I understand you here correctly, but what I meant was that
anything we do in Phase 1 needs to have a clear path to enabling further
extensions. These planned extensions will most likely influence Phase 1
because, for example, we need a way to say what the syntax and semantics of
a rule set is intended to be. Even though this might seem unnecessary in
the unitary world, this same rule set will have to live in a Phase 2
world with other semantics, so it must be prepared to declare its
characteristics in that larger context.

Received on Sunday, 28 May 2006 07:26:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:39 UTC