Re: a simple question

PatH:
[fully agreed]
>                                           The
> industrial uses of Prolog-style rules all are
> designed within controlled environments,
> typically using databases, where such special
> conditions can be assumed. But on the web, we
> can't assume that we are living in such a
> controlled environment. We need to make those
> critical assumptions explicit somehow if we are
> going to make rules that can survive in the real
> world.

For the test cases till now, we have been trying to
find that explicitness by not only showing the
conclusion, but by returning an explanation like
e.g.
{
  (# list of explicitly assumed RDF formulae
   <premise-uri1>.log:semantics
   <premise-uri2>.log:semantics).log:conjunction
  =>
 <conclusion-uri>.log:semantics
}
reason:because
{
  {# a recursive form of
   {given-or-derived-grounded-facts} => {intermediate-conclusion}}
  =>
 {grounded-conclusion}.
 # an iteration for other grounded-conclusions from conclusion-uri
}.

which is meant as an example of an RDF formula :)

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/