- From: Wagner, G.R. <G.R.Wagner@tm.tue.nl>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:36:22 +0100
- To: "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Cc: <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>
> WOWG looked for a way to do this, and realized we would not be able to do it -- > I don't see why the rules group would expect success I don't see why the rules group should fail only because WOWG has failed to do this. WOWG could afford to fail here, because the issue at stake was not essential for the WOWG folks/mission, but for web rules this issue is essential! > unless they could start from an existing solution -- and I've seen > no proposal with a solution that seems workable. But obviously there are (partial?) solutions, such as in N3/cwm and in Buchingae/Bossam. And Benjamin and Drew have made a clear point that a semantic web query and rules processor does need a well-defined scope of the underlying knowledge base, so the concepts of closure/failure are applicable. -Gerd --------------------------------------- Gerd Wagner http://tmitwww.tm.tue.nl/staff/gwagner/ Dep. Information & Technology Eindhoven University of Technology Email: G.Wagner@tm.tue.nl Phone: (+31 40) 247 26 17 Fax: (+31 40) 247 26 12
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 05:37:36 UTC