- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 01:57:36 -0400 (EDT)
- To: bry@ifi.lmu.de
- Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
From: Francois Bry <bry@ifi.lmu.de> Subject: Re: RIF: Production and Event-Condition-Action Rules Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 13:37:11 +0200 > Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > >> A few thoughts on Production and Event-Condition-Action Rules and the RIF: > >> > >> 1. Production and Event-Condition-Action Rules are a must for RIF > >> because they are needed for many applications. > > > > I believe that this is only necessarily the case under two extra > > assumptions: > > 1/ That the widescale adoption goal must be met. > > 2/ That the widescale adoption goal cannot be met without having these > > applications. > > I do not believe that either of the assumptions are true. I do not believe > > that either of the assumptions are held by all the other members of the > > working group. > > In my opinion, assumption 2 is considerably more likely than its negation. I believe that this depends on one's viewpoint. In particular, what counts as "widescale adoption"? The RIF WG is in the Semantic Web activity, so I would argue that only Semantic Web applications count for widescale adoption - handling other applications is nice, but not necessary. > Assumption 1 is already given by the very concept of Semantic Web. I don't understand this last statement. Do you mean that the very concept of the Semantic Web means that the widescale adoption goal must be met? I don't see how this can follow. Perhaps you mean that the very concept of the Semantic Web means that the widescale adoption goal has already been met? I suppose that one could argue along these lines, and I would be somewhat sympathetic to such an argument, but I think that there would be considerable resistance to this from some in the working group. > Francois peter
Received on Saturday, 3 June 2006 05:57:55 UTC