W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > April 2008

Re: where to hang the metadata?

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 12:42:26 -0400
To: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <8695.1209400946@cs.sunysb.edu>


> Michael,
> 
> You are right (of course :-) and rule do not have any kind of special 
> first-class existence in logic. But shouldn't they, nonetheless, have 
> some kind of first-class existence in a rule interchange format?

They already do have first-class existence. Adding a wrapper does not add
anything but bloat.

> Michael Kifer wrote:
> > 
> > The Rule wrapper is unacceptable from the FLD point of view.
> > I am glad that there is FLD to keep us honest :-)
> > And this extra wrapper is just bloat that gives nothing.
> > 
> > All this mess indicates to me that the only good solution is our original
> > proposal to use Group only. All the talk about the first-class existence
> > for rules reminds me medieval disputations about how many devils can fit on
> > a needle point.
> 
> Or, couldn't "all this mess" indicate that trying to have RIF-FLD cover 
> FOL is just trying to embrace too much at this stage?

It is not FOL that I am worried about. There are important systems, like
DLV and smodels, which I am worried about. Calling their constructs "rules"
is possible, but is a bit of a stretch.

> I can envision that there could be a future LIFE WG (logic interchange 
> format for everyone) chartered to develop a logic dialect framework that 
> would encompass RIF-FLD (the framework for logic dialects of the rule 
> interchange format) as a special case for the kind of formulae that some 
> user/developer communities call "rules"...
> 
> Just thinking about what is a reasonable scope for this WG, and where to 
> stop...

Why are you talking with riddles? Are you proposing to junk FLD? 


	--michael  


> Christian
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 16:43:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:48 GMT