W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > November 2003

Re: Rules WG -- draft charter -- NAF

From: Stefan Decker <stefan@ISI.EDU>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:13:36 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org

>Where did Description Logics come into the story?  Just about any language
>that goes beyond ground atomic facts and datalog has this issue.  How would
>you close P(a) v P(b) with respect to P?  Even just adding functional
>properties to RDFS causes issues.

Maybe we should start slowly by defining exactly what the problem is that the
rule language is supposed to solve, and then we may try to look for solutions.
It could be a good start if we are just defining rules for RDF graphs and 
not take the
semantics of the language encoded in the RDF graph into account.

If we want to take the semantics into account, let us try to define what the
problem is, and look at which part of the problem a rule language can 
solve, and
how to incorporate solutions for the other problems.
Do you have a definition of the problem you are trying to solve?



Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 12:13:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:15 UTC