W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > September 2010

Re: First order logic and SPARQL

From: Bob MacGregor <bob.macgregor@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 13:21:30 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTin=YbogmTCrrUEJ=L-p8K9y_sCybtv-pKxE_yXA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: Adrian Walker <adriandwalker@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org, public-sparql-dev@w3.org
I would say that the mindset "NAF is not appropriate for SPARQL" is a piece
of the explanation for the
glacial pace of adoption of Semantic Web technology in commercial settings.
If indeed SPARQL is
supposed to be religiously open-world (I'm not saying I agree), then IMO
that strengthens the argument for
the adoption of a second RDF language, e.g., something like non-recursive
Datalog with negation, that
is more practical/useful.

Bob

On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:

>
> On Sep 6, 2010, at 12:13 AM, Bob MacGregor wrote:
>
> Hi Pat,
>
> On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
>
> On Sep 5, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Bob MacGregor wrote:
>
> > My personal interest is in a query language for RDF that's easy to use,
> and, among other things,
> > has a negation operator that is intuitive.
>
> Id be interested to know what you consider to be intuitive here. Is
> negation by failure intuitive for most Web sources? Do you routinely
> conclude, from a failure to find a sentence asserted on a website, that it
> is false?
>
> Fundamental to your argument seems to be "sentence asserted on a
> website".   If I grabbed
> triples from some random Website, I might not be confident in using NAF.
> But I don't do that.  I work
> with graphs that I've built from sources I trust, and I know which parts of
> the graph are expected to
> be complete, and NAF is perfect for those parts.
>
>
> Well, bully for you, but SPARQL is supposed to be a standard for use with
> RDF on the Web. These nice assumptions of completeness just where you expect
> it cannot be sustained in the wider world of RDF data, and there is no way
> to transmit them (the assumptions) even when they are correct. So NAF is not
> appropriate for SPARQL.
>
> Pat
>
>
> - Bob
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
=====================================
Robert MacGregor
bob.macgregor@gmail.com
Mobile: 818-397-3468
=====================================
Received on Monday, 6 September 2010 20:22:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:38 GMT