W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2013

Re: SPIN prospects

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@knublauch.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:05:35 +1000
Message-ID: <5109ED8F.7010107@knublauch.com>
To: semantic-web@w3.org
On 1/31/2013 13:38, Paul Tyson wrote:
> Perhaps the W3C folks will take note and reconsider whether SPIN 
> should be tied to RIF future, or if it might have a useful place 
> alongside SPARQL (regardless of how RIF fares).

My impression is that RIF isn't going anywhere and adding SPIN into the 
mix may bloat it further while making SPIN appear more complicating than 
it really is. But parts of SPIN can be readily attached to the SPARQL 
spec, especially the comparably small vocabulary to add new SPARQL 
functions (which we and our customers use a lot, because it makes SPARQL 
snippets reusable and thus leads to much more maintainable query 
libraries.) Unlike with SPIN rules, there also isn't much to debate 
about the semantics of those functions, avoiding potential fights with 
the logic camp.

Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 04:06:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:39 UTC