- From: Kathryn Blackmond Laskey <klaskey@gmu.edu>
- Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 14:20:36 -0400
- To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net>, Valentin Zacharias <Zacharias@fzi.de>
- Cc: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>, SW-forum list <semantic-web@w3.org>, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net>
>...I could accept the idea of a common notation for if-then rules, >but with two very clearly specified options for the semantics: > > 1. A purely classical FOL that is compatible with CL and its > subsets, such as Z, RDF(S), and OWL. > > 2. A negation-as-failure semantics that is compatible with the > ISO standard for Prolog. > >If you want that, then say so. But make it very, very clear that >the two semantics are *not* compatible -- and that no attempt to >exchange rules between the two versions of semantics should be >done, except under stringently controlled conditions. The idea of a single syntax with two different incompatible semantics scares me. K
Received on Friday, 3 August 2007 18:34:40 UTC