W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > June 2001

Re: rdf as a base for other languages

From: Geoff Chappell <geoff@sover.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 10:14:03 -0400
Message-ID: <133b01c0eb6e$47497420$835ec6d1@goat>
To: "Peter Crowther" <peter.crowther@networkinference.com>, "'Graham Klyne'" <GK@ninebynine.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Chappell" <geoff@sover.net>
To: "Peter Crowther" <peter.crowther@networkinference.com>; "'Graham Klyne'"
<GK@ninebynine.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 7:47 AM
Subject: Re: rdf as a base for other languages


>
> It only seems reasonable that any number of different reasoning systems
will
> be build to work with RDF with many accepting the various logical
> restrictions of prolog, datalog, etc. in exchange for performance. Surely
> each of these systems can encode its own language as rdf triples. Even if
it
> means that only a similar system can interpret that language, any system
can
> interpret the output of the system (as long as it is conforming ground
> triple rdf). And if each of those systems included a description of its
> reasoning system in kif, we would have the basis for interchange of other
> than ground facts between systems.
>
> Is that unreasonable? unworkable?
>
> Geoff
>

Just playing with this concept a bit more...

Imagine there is a kb identified by a url (http://www.somewhere.com/kb)

The kb is a prolog-based system containing:

s('type','mycar','car').
s('hasPart',X,'wheel'):-s('type',X,'car').

Imagine the system supports content type negotiation.

An agent requesting the kb as application/x-rdf-simple will get
(appropriately xml-ized):
    {rdf:type,mycar,car}
    {hasPart,mycar,wheel}

An agent requesting the kb as application/x-rdf-prolog will get
(appropriately xml-ized):
    {rdf:type,mycar,car}
    {rdf:type,rule1,prolog:rule}
    {prolog:body,rule1,triple1}
    {prolog:head,rule1,tripe2}
    {...} reified triples of head and body

An agent requesting the kb as application/x-rdf-kif will get (appropriately
xml-ized):
    {rdf:type,mycar,car}
    {rdf:type,rule1,prolog:rule}
    {prolog:body,rule1,triple1}
    {prolog:head,rule1,tripe2}
    {...} reified triples of head and body
    {...} triple(s) in in kif mapping prolog rules (in general) to kif
functionality
    {...} triple(s) describing unique names assumption
    {...} triple(s) describing closed world assumption

You can imagine that there could be translation servers that would supply
you with application/x-rdf-n3, application/x-rdf-daml, etc. even if the
system didn't support it directly.

Is there any value in this perspective? Does RDF in its current incarnation
fit as the bottom layer (as described here)?

Geoff
Received on Saturday, 2 June 2001 12:16:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:40 GMT