- From: Francois Bry <bry@ifi.lmu.de>
- Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:02:02 +0100
- To: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Piero A. Bonatti wrote: >On Wednesday 08 February 2006 12:49, Francois Bry wrote: > > >>1. RIF's formal semantics might, and may be should, be more abstract >>than those of existing processable rule languages. Eg making it possible >>to express "negation as failure" without choosing between Stable Model >>and Well-Founded semsntics. >> >> >metadata tagging with the intended semantics would be a possible approach > > This is exactly what I meant. -- Francois
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2006 08:02:09 UTC