W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > September 2009

(Re: FAQ questions 3.10 + 3.11)

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:22:02 +0100
Message-Id: <D51EBB4D-9CC3-4174-B245-A2F6224D7B17@deri.org>
To: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
I updated 3.10 in the FAQ as follows:

=== Is RIF useful for reasoning about the provenance of claims  
expressed in RDF, eg. multiple named graphs in SPARQL that offer  
competing accounts of some situation? ===

If the differing named graphs are located in different web documents,  
then RIF with RDF compatibility (see [http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf- 
owl]) has an import mechanism that can be directed to the specific web  
documents and reason about them. More refined notions of import that  
allow to explicitly refer to facts from different imported documents  
per rule could be covered in extended RIF dialects.
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2009 08:22:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:56 UTC