- From: Francois Bry <bry@ifi.lmu.de>
- Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 15:13:53 +0100
- Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >I am puzzled by the following section of >http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/RIF_Use_Cases_and_Requirements > > >This does not sound to me like the WG is prohibited from specifying a rule >language. In fact, one of the Phase 1 deliverables of the WG is > > A W3C Recommendation providing technical specifications of the > interchange format, suitable for implementers of rule engines and rule > language translation software. > > I fully agree with Peter. IMHO, RIF should be a (parsable) formal language than can (but must not) have processors (either for the full language or for fragment of it). I hardly see a rational in stating that RIF should not be machine processable. -- Francois
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 14:14:02 UTC