W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-urw3@w3.org > September 2007

RE: URW3 questions on RIF

From: Giorgos Stoilos <gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:32:47 +0300
Message-Id: <200709211032.l8LAWmHc013402@manolito.image.ece.ntua.gr>
To: "'Ken Laskey'" <klaskey@mitre.org>, <public-xg-urw3@w3.org>

Hi all,

Sorry for missing again but I was travelling back from Aberdeen. I see there
was a quite lively discussion over RIF. 

See my comments inline. Sorry if I misunderstood anything but trying to
figure out the context from the IRC logs is quite hard. Moreover, if you
feel that I skipped any important point please highlight it in a following
email, and perhaps add some more details on it.

________________________________________
>From: public-xg-urw3-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-urw3-request@w3.org]
>On Behalf Of Ken Laskey
>Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:17 PM
>To: Giorgos Stoilos
>Cc: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
>Subject: URW3 questions on RIF
>
>Giorgos,
>
>We discussed your report and were interested in what the RIF WG has in mind
>for dialects. From the IRC log (now linked from the URW3 Member Home Page)
>
><KathyL> Ken mentioned the idea of dialects from RIF
><anne_cregan> Some methods may be incommensurate, and identifying that is
>in itself a valuable contribution
><KathyL> In fact, Ken discussed with somebody that uncertainty information
>might be represented
><KathyL> as a dialect in RIF

Well, several uncertainty-LP approaches, like probabilistic logic
programming, fuzzy LP, possibilistic LP, annotation LP, could to some degree
be uniformly represented as a RIF Dialect. Checkout our FI paper
http://www.image.ece.ntua.gr/php/savepaper.php?id=481.

But, I am not sure what do you mean by uncertainty information. 

><Ken> Anne's idea of ways to capture info for different methods could be
>like RIF dialects built over a base
>

All RIF dialects share a common core (RIF Core) which is Horn logic. I am
not sure that uncertainty frameworks could share such a common core.

>
><Ken> Q: is RIF just going to write official dialects or will it provide
>enough of a documented framework that others can write dialects?
><Ken> do new dialects need RIF WG blessing?
>
>
><KathyL> Kathy suggested that if there is a mechanism to define dialects
><KathyL> then we can allow dialects to evolve de facto
><KathyL> without declaring them official prematurely

It will provide some dialects as standards (neither which nor how many is
known yet) but it will also provide the framework for creating the RIF
dialect of your favourite rule language/system X. 

So you could create your own dialect, say RIF_X but then,
i) you should provide the world with the X->RIF_X and RIF_X->X translators
in order for anyone using language X to communicate with you, and worse
ii) If RIF_X is not a standard (not specified by the RIF WG or by any other
W3C effort) there could always be someone else writing RIF_X differently and
arguing that his is more correct than yours.

Best,
-gstoil
 

>
>Can you comment on this?
>
>Thanks,

Ken

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Ken Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934
7151 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508
Received on Friday, 21 September 2007 10:32:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 April 2008 09:52:44 GMT