[UCR] ISSUE-12 and ACTION6198

Issue 12 [1] is the proposal to make an explicit goal of the WG that 
"RIF should form a useful basis for a core semantic web rule language 
(or small number of such)." (DaveR proposes: "RIF should be usable as 
the basis for a Semantic Web rule language" [2]).

I have an action to propose text representing my position as a 
counter-proposal (ACTION-198 [3]).

Here is the text I propose:
----------------------------------
PROPOSED - The RIF WG will define a small number of standard dialects. 
Although the design goal of each dialect will be rule interchange, any
or all of these dialects may be considered standard semantic web rule 
languages.
----------------------------------

Actually, this text is mostly attributable to ChrisW. During a 
discussion we had where I was trying to make my position clear to Sandro 
and him, he proposed:
<<The RIF WG will define a small number of standard dialects.  Although
the primary design goal of each dialect will be rule interchange, any
or all of these dialects may be considered standard semantic web rule 
languages.>>

I leave to you to find what is the difference and why I could not agree 
on Chris's text (Chris forbade me to explain :-)

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/12
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Sep/0024.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/198

Christian

Received on Wednesday, 20 December 2006 16:38:20 UTC