Hi All --
I have been reading with great interest Ian Horrocks' excellent proposal for OWL Rules,
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/DAML/Rules/ , in which he gives a model theory for the meanings of collections of rules.
"Rules have variables, so treating them as a semantic extension of
RDF is very difficult. It is, however, still possible to provide an
RDF syntax for rules---it is just that the semantics of the resultant
RDF graphs will not be an extension of the RDF Semantics."
To a mere an outside observer of a major project like OWL/RDF, this looks kind of strange.
It brings to mind some questions:
Why have RDF do any inferencing at all?
Should RDF in future be restricted just a passive data representation ?
Is it just a distraction to try add the limited inferencing currently posited for RDF itself, since it looks to be incompatible with useful inference-based Semantic Web applications ?
Or, have I missed something here ? Thanks in advance for your comments.
Business Intelligence Rules in English + Semantic Data Integration + Your Oracle Databases
Dr. Adrian Walker
PO Box 1412
CT 06011-1412 USA
Phone: USA 860 583 9677
Cell: USA 860 830 2085
Fax: USA 860 314 1029