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

Re: where to hang the metadata?

From: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:12:28 +0200
Message-ID: <4816138C.3090601@ilog.fr>
To: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
CC: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
Christian de Sainte Marie wrote:
> Or replace them all by an abstract construct that could be specialised 
> into Groups, Rules, Facts, Whachamacallit etc in concrete dialects;

To make my point more clearly, and, hopefully to help progress the 
discussion, here is a diagram 5 of FLD with only abstract classes for 
the content of a Document: a RIF Document contains zero to many objects 
of the abstract class MACHIN, which can be subdivided into objects of 
the abstract class TRUC and objects of the abstract class CHOUETTE.

A Document can have metadata attached, as does any (concrete) object of 
a MACHIN class as well, but this might actually be orthogonal to the 
discussion (as I suspect Paul is arguing in the part of his email that I 
did not read yet :-)

The main difference between the TRUC and CHOUETTE (abstract) subclasses 
of MACHIN is whether they recurse (on MACHIN) or not: TRUC does not and 
CHOUETTE does. So, TRUC concrete classes are FORMULA classifiers, 
whereas CHOUETTE concrete classes are classifiers of FORMULA grouping 

Another difference is that TRUC (concrete) objects are directly 
associated to a FORMULA, whereas CHOUETTE objects are associated to 
groups of FORMULAs only via the concrete classifiers of the TRUC class, 
if any.

Now, what if FLD could specify only these abstract constructs, with 
whatever names seem most appropriate, and leave it to concrete dialect 
to specify the concrete classes they need?

One dialect, say: BLD, could use one CHOUETTE concrete class called 
Group, and two concrete TRUC classes called Rule and Fact; whereas 
another dialect, say: PRD, could have only one concrete TRUC class 
called Rule and no concrete class for CHOUETTE at all.

Yet another concrete dialect could have only one concrete CHOUETTE class 
(Group) and no concrete TRUC class: Group vould thus contain zero or 
many Groups or FORMULAs, as is the case in the current draft of BLD and 

Would something like that work? Or be amenable to work?

And would it help resolve the ISSUE 51?



(image/jpeg attachment: Diagram_5__FLD_with_abstract_classes_.jpg)

Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 18:12:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:50 UTC