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

Re: [RIF-APS] Rules Sign

From: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:59:55 -0700
Message-ID: <48BD7F1B.6040209@oracle.com>
To: kifer@cs.sunysb.edu
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

Java's terms aren't bad:

i instanceof c
c extends cc
name contains val

I think = makes sense for named args:  foo(a=1, b=2)

Yes, the comma was intentional.  Almost everyone wants a comma here.

Not everybody will support logical functions.  Yet everyone will support 
the builtins.  These External() wrappers are really annoying.  They 
should not be required for the "official" built-ins.

Michael Kifer wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:44:37 -0400
> Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Syntax for named arguments to use '('Name  TERM)')' instead of (Name '->' TERM)
>> Syntax for frames to use TERM '::' TERM instead of TERM '->' TERM
>> Syntax for member to use TERM 'TY' TERM instead of TERM '#' TERM
>> Syntax for subclass to us TERM 'SC' TERM instaed of TERM '##' TERM
> You are proposing to replace perfectly good syntax with ugly alternatives.
> CSMA's proposal for using Name = Term is bad because it misleadingly suggests
> that there is only one value for Name, but in fact the value of Name is a set
> and Term is just one of the values in a set.
> If you want to overhaul the syntax and free up -> for (classical) implication,
> then let's use something that mnemonically makes sense:
>    a isa b
>    c subclassOf cc or c sub cc
>    name hasValue val  or name hasVal val
>    etc.
> We should use a different sign for rule implication both in BLD and in PRD.
> That should be => <= and not -> <- (provided that we agree on the overall
> overhaul).
> 	--michael  
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 18:02:05 UTC

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