[Brian McBride] Can you point me to an explanation as to why extending RDF is the better approach? Why is it necessary or better that RDF be a sub-language of LL? At the risk of repeating what others have said, here is my explanation: The case you are thinking of is something like this: There is a statement P, expressed in RDF, and a rule, P=>Q, expressed in some other language, such that an inference engine, looking at the two, could infer Q, a purely RDF conclusion. Unfortunately, not all rules operate purely on conjunctions. E.g., (or P Q), (not Q) => P So we still have to come up with a way of representing complex formulas, which requires extending RDF. -- Drew McDermottReceived on Tuesday, 5 June 2001 12:35:57 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:40 GMT