Re: ISSUE-73 (Membership/subclass in Core?): Should Core support the membership and subclass syntax and semantics? [Core]

Thanks. Apologies for not spotting that one.
Dave

Chris Welty wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks Dave for opening these issues.  One bookkeeping note, I closed 
> issue 73 and merged the text with the existing issue-48.
> 
> -Chris
> 
> Rule Interchange Format Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>
>> ISSUE-73 (Membership/subclass in Core?): Should Core support the 
>> membership and subclass syntax and semantics? [Core]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/73
>>
>> Raised by: Dave Reynolds
>> On product: Core
>>
>> We've previously suggested membership and subclass be omitted form 
>> CORE on the grounds that CORE is minimal and those can regarded as 
>> largely syntactic sugar.
>>
>> Many PR systems have a notion of object with a type and class 
>> hierarchy and so there is some support for member and subclass in PRD 
>> which suggests they should be in Core. However, since such systems 
>> often can't support assertion of membership or subclass relations, 
>> only query of it, then PRD currently doesn't permits rules to conclude 
>> (assert) a member or subclass relation. 
>> So the maximal intersection of BLD and PRD would only permit query not 
>> derivation of these properties. Such a limitation complicates the 
>> presentation of Core and restricts implementations of Core from using 
>> them to export type relations which don't meet those constraints.
>> Should we err on the side of simplicity (just leave them out) or 
>> maximal intersection (include them along with constraints on usage)?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>