Re: [BLD] some more commments which I didn't manage to type in yesterday...

Cherry picking a bit.

On 3 Oct 2007, at 19:01, Jos de Bruijn wrote:

[snip]
> I don't like this notion of a multitude of dialects;

I share this dislike.

> this just makes
> things far too complicated. I also do not really see any obvious
> criteria we could use for identifying these dialects, apart from the
> distinction horn/not horn, which basically boils down to OWL DLP/DL

Well, there are other horn and horn like fragments, e.g., hornSHIQ.

One job of OWL-WG is to rationalize the species. I'm sure the needs  
of RIF are great input for that.

[snip]
>> Ok, in the OWLED meeting in Innsbruck (which certainly is a different
>> issue thant the now active working group), I had the impression that
>> what they want to go for in this dierection is a "stamp" for DL-safe.
>> Anyway, htey can always define dialects for that.
>
> What "they" want is different from what the charter is of a working  
> group.
[snip]

This is very true. However, OWLED does strive to build consensus in  
the OWL community (or significant fragments thereof), so I would hope  
that input from OWLED would be welcome and helpful to RIF.

There is an OWLED task force working on DL Safe SWRL rules for OWL  
(i.e., defining a syntax, generating tutorials, getting implementors  
behind it), so I think it will be a significant rules formalism  
related to OWL.

> DL-safe rules  are simply a syntactic restriction on the case of
> combination with OWL DL; the semantics are strictly FOL.  If we are
> going to support OWL DL, then I certainly want to mention this
> particular restriction.  We might even want to include particular
> support for it in the language ( i.e. adding implicit predicates to  
> the
> rules which have forced this restriction ).
[snip]

Twould be good to coordinate a tad. Speaking as an OWL vendor with  
significant interest in rule extensions (of various sorts!) it would  
be nice if RIF met our needs enough that we could usefully, for  
example, contribute to CR. Evangilizing to the users is a good way to  
do that, for us.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Bijan.

Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 18:15:33 UTC