- From: Jos de Bruijn <jos.debruijn@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:24:16 +0000
- To: "Ginsberg, Allen" <AGINSBERG@imc.mitre.org>
- Cc: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
I agree that there should be an additional use case around the use of RDF. Perhaps there should also be a similar use case around OWL; or the use of OWL could be integrated in the use case. I suppose this use case could then subsume the Rich Knowledge Representation use case, which could then be removed. I guess this would take away most of Jim's comments on the Rich Knowledge Representation use case (with which I agree). Best, Jos On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 12:40 -0500, Ginsberg, Allen wrote: > Hi Dave, > > Thanks for your feedback. > > Maybe it was a mistake to include Message Transformation under Third > Party Rule-Interchange Services because the former actually does not > involve interchange of rules so much as interchange of RDF-based data > that has been massaged by rules. I think it was the fact that Message > Transformation includes a third-party, namely the "Mediary Service," > that led me to see that connection. > > The rules in the Message Transformation use-case are RDF-transformation > rules. The RIF charter is very clear about the importance of > compatiblity with RDF semantics. So I am wondering if there shouldn't > be a new general use case category with a title something like > "Cross-Ontology RDF-Data Interchange." This could be based on a > fleshed-out version of your original use-case. What we want is a > detailed scenario. In your orignal use-case Wiki page you say: "A > concrete narrative and example data set and rules could be provided if > it becomes clear this is a useful enough case to expand in such > detail," so I gather you could provide one. > > Obviously this is something that the WG as a whole has to agree upon. > > > Allen > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dave Reynolds > Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 11:23 AM > To: RIF > Subject: [UCR] Coverage > > > [Second email required to submit a "no" answer on the strawpoll, this > time > for section "coverage".] > > A primary use case for us is the use of rules to transform a set of RDF > > statements from one ontology to another: > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Message_Transformation > > This use case has been grouped under general use case section 7 (Third > Party Rule-Interchange Services) but that section of the UCR draft > document > seems specific to policy rules. One would not guess an ability of RIF > to > express RDF transformations from the write up of that section. > > The ontology transformation use case may be implicit as a special case > of > Information Integration, if so it needs to more explicit in that > section. > > Dave > > > > > -- Jos de Bruijn, http://www.debruijn.net/ +43 512 507 6475 jos.debruijn@deri.org DERI http://www.deri.org/ ---------------------------------------------- Arguments are to be avoided; they are always vulgar and often convincing. -- Oscar Wilde
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 10:24:52 UTC