- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 17:26:45 +0000
- To: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Mark van Assem wrote: > > Hi, > >> But following up with this idea, and the other way round of Antoine's >> proposal, the concept scheme itself could integrate the declaration >> of its indexing rules, in the form of some equivalent for machines of >> skos:scopeNote, which conveys, if you look closely, some sort of >> indexing rule for humans. >> So something like skos:indexingRule, which could contain a formal > > For the simple transformation that seems required here an OWL reasoner > might work fine, but I understand the sentiment. > > I would prefer a format for rules that can be shared across ontologies > instead of a proposal that's specific to SKOS, but I don't know the > status of the Rule Interchange Format... [1] RIF is defining an interchange format for rules, it is not defining a semantic web rule language. There is some discussion on whether there is a possible compromise where some non-normative work could be done on using the interchange format as "the basis for" a semantic web compatible rule language but I am personally not hopeful that that compromise will succeed. If someone can spell out what the use cases are for rules in SKOS (I've not been following this discussion thread I'm afraid) then it might be that those could be factored into the RIF use cases. Especially if they raise any interchange or representation issues that might not otherwise be covered by RIF. Dave
Received on Saturday, 11 November 2006 17:26:48 UTC