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

Re: DAML+RDFS: potentials for simplifications?

From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@home.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:05:42 -0500
Message-ID: <000801c178de$eeffaa10$7cac1218@cj64132b>
To: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
<Joachim.Peer@unisg.ch>

>[...]
> You say, a result of the simplified syntax is, that a processor would need
> a "set of conventions". Yes, but how does this differ from the current
> situation? Are you aware of any DAML interpreter which has no hardcoded
set
> of DAML specific instructions?
>
My point exactly - why create a new set to replace the existing?

[...]

> this definition tells an RDF aware application only half of the story...
It
> tells nothing about the semantic implications of this construct. So if one
> wants to have a DAML aware agent, one will need to tell it explicitly what
> e.g "unionOf" means.
>
> this was a bit disapointing to me, and this was the point where i began to
> ask myself: why all the complexity if the core problems (having to hard
> code DAML aware agents) remains?
>

Yes, it's so, RDF-aware processors don't have to know any DAML.  And RDF
would be just one possible way to transport DAML statements.  GIven that XML
will no doubt underlie any other DAML-transport scheme (for web
applications, anyway), you don't suggest that the xml parser should
understand DAML, do you?  The real question seems to be whether RDF will be
an adequate container for DAML.  If so, better to use it so that standard
RDF parsers, etc., can be used to support a DAML engine.  Going a step
further, if you do use RDF should the DAML database (or statementbase)
consist of triples - thus keeping the RDF model in play in the DAML
processing - or not?

> hmmm... when would i want to specify jsmith:label, if i want to assign a
> label (name) to a DAML class? who would make use of such information?
>
> i think, the core question now is: is there a way to "dynamically upgrade"
> an agent's knowledge/capability base by importing some RDF code which
marks
> up logic axioms? (or will this be the role of DAML ?) has anybody more
> information on this?
>

Lots of people are interested in this one, I've noticed.  There have been
some recent posts about it in either this list or www-rdf-interest@w3.org
(or probably both, but I haven't searched for them).

Cheers,

Tom P
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2001 09:05:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:16:02 UTC