RE: [RIF] [UCR]: What is the RIF (revisited)

At 04:59 PM 2/8/2006 +0100, 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!


1) They are ONLY a problem for the inference engines!!!!!!!!!
So for the ONLY thing that really counts.

2) Mentioning SWRL to me is not very convincing either. It is
a political motivated restriction of FOL without returning anything
in return in terms of computational complexity.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dieter Fensel, http://www.deri.org/
Tel.: +43-512-5076485/8
Skype: dieterfensel

Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 16:23:19 UTC