- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 11:42:37 -0400
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, "Peter F.Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>, public-rdf-wg WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 00:11 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote: > The rules are a kind of introduction to implementing reasoners, > although they are pretty awful when viewed in this light. Does anyone have some good references on this? Maybe a textbook or survey paper on building reasoners, which uses terminology and examples well-matched with RDF, if not exactly RDF examples? I think there's a perception that rules are a quick and easy way to build a decent reasoner. Maybe that question is ill-formed, since it all depends what kind of logic one is trying to reason on, and RDFS, OWL Direct Semantics and OWL RDF-Based Semantics are quite different. Is there a way we can talk about this in spec? Maybe a non-normative section in RDF Semantics, "Implementation Advice", with few paragraphs about implementation techniques, including some good references? I think we can assume some professional competence, here, Pat, but RDF is kind of a cross-field thing, and very few people are trained to know much about automated reasoning AND distributed databases AND and Web protocols and formats. -- Sandro
Received on Monday, 14 May 2012 15:42:56 UTC