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

Re: [RIF-APS] Rules Sign

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 13:32:09 -0400
To: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
Cc: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>, Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>, Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@biotec.tu-dresden.de>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080902133209.20641947@kiferserv>

On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 18:45:40 +0200
Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr> wrote:

> Michael Kifer wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:39:36 +0200
> > Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Why not use = for frames instead, as in obj[prop = val]?
> >>
> >>As I suggested on IRC during last week's telecon, that would reflect the
> >>semantics that the frame is true iff the value of property 'prop' for object
> >>'obj' is equal to 'val'. 
> > 
> > 
> > Such a frame is true NOT if the value is equal to val, but if the value of prop
> > CONTAINS val.
> Right. I forgot that. But my point about making it extensible to using other tests than equality remains.

We can allow extensions that use whatever u want in between name and value.
This has nothing to do with whether we use -> or hasValue, or whatever.

B.t.w., the -> is not new and is well established. In this kind of languages it
goes back almost 25 years to Hasan's Login, or maybe even earlier. I always
thought that the use of -> comes from C and C++, where -> is used to refer to
values of properties. And it is also used in SQL in some cases.

So, Chris' claim that -> always evokes implication is highly subjective.
It depends who you ask.

Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 17:33:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:52 UTC