Re: Question about W3C Rule Interchange Format

Hi all wrote:
>> Piero and All - could this lack of progress (specifically in terms of the
>> two highlighted points) be due to the fact that RIF is a reasonably recent
>> specification or are there any intrinsic adoption  problem (e.g.
>> complexity, lack of requirements/needs, no support from vendors, etc.)?
>> Any clue?
> well, as far as I can observe the main reason might actually be that RIF
> is  young. moreover, the usual issues affected the standardization
> progress:
> - wheel rediscovery and complication of simple things due to different
> background, company interests etc.
> - eventually lots of effort to publish a document on the core of the
> standard in reasonable time (I believe the first recommendation has been
> released very recently)
> - all advanced/specific topics postponed

I don't know the extent to which these issues arose with RIF, but it is 
worth pointing out that some of the RIF specs are in Last Call now, and 
that that careful review of these would be very useful for all concerned.

Six RIF Working Drafts Published; Last Call for Basic Logic Dialect and 

2008-08-01: The Rule Interchange Format (RIF) Working Group published 
six documents yesterday:

     * RIF Basic Logic Dialect (Last Call)
     * RIF RDF and OWL Compatibility (Last Call)
     * RIF Framework for Logic Dialects
     * RIF Use Cases and Requirements
     * RIF Production Rule Dialect (First Public Draft)
     * RIF Datatypes and Built-Ins 1.0

"RIF Basic Logic Dialect" (BLD) specifies an XML format for rules at an 
intermediate expressive power. The language is roughly Horn rules with 
URIs, datatypes, and builtins. This goes beyond datalog (it has function 
terms), but does not provide any kind of negation. "RIF RDF and OWL 
Compatibility" explains and specifies how RIF rulesets are to be used in 
combination with RDF and OWL. Comments on these documents welcome until 
19 September. In addition, RIF Production Rule Dialect (PRD) specifies 
an XML format for the exchange of production rules. PRD and BLD are 
expected to be the basis of the two main dialect-branches, with RIF Core 
being the things in common between the two. RIF Framework for Logic 
Dialects (FLD) and RIF Datatypes and Builtins (DTB) provide common 
elements for specific dialects to use. RIF Uses Cases and Requirements 
(UCR), last published about two years ago, has been simplified and now 
has examples written in the PRD and BLD presentation syntaxes. Learn 
more about the Semantic Web Activity.]]

Comments are invited to --- see the status 
section of each document for details.




Received on Sunday, 31 August 2008 20:07:31 UTC