- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:11:57 +0000
- To: Gerd Wagner <wagnerg@tu-cottbus.de>
- CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Gerd Wagner wrote: >>>2. RIF could allow for rules the processing of which goes >>>beyond what currently is widespread. Eg rules with >>>disjunctive conclusions. > > >>[...] We will have enough on our plate to deal with >>commercial rules engine expressiveness, SWRL, OWL and RDF. >>If the choice is supporting disjunctive consequents and >>having a RIF model theory in 6 months that we can all >>accept, I'll take the latter. > > > But OWL/SWRL have already introduced disjunctive > conclusions (which btw are not a problem for the > model-theoretic semantics, even not when combined > with NAF; they are only a problem for the inference > engines), so this is not PhD research! But it is a problem for inference engines, as you say, and that affects RIF. If those features are only commonly implemented in research systems then it is not a priority for RIF to be able to express them. IMHO RIF should err on the side of least common denominator rather than greatest common multiple. Dave
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 16:13:06 UTC