Re: Draft prooosed 4th goal: RIF should be usable as the basis for a semantic web rule language

Dave Reynolds wrote:

>To discharge my first action from f2f3 I have drafted an initial write 
>up my proposed fourth goal. It is on the Wiki at:
>
>http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/RIF_should_be_usable_as_the_basis_for_a_semantic_web_rule_language
>
>and is linked from the page or recently added open issues.

You can add my name to the list of champions for this goal.  Achieving 
this goal was my motivation for advocated the creation of a Rule WG in the 
Semantic Web Activity, and why I joined RIF.  

A couple of comments:

>From the text of the proposed Goal:
>To achieve interoperability we need one, or some *small* number of, recommended 
>semantics that we believe is compatible with, and useful for, the semantic web.
>
>By saying 'basis for ...' then we allow RIF to, for example, omit a human usable 
>syntax. We also allow the possibility that the recommended profile is an 
>informative rather than normative part of the spec. For example, it might be a 
>suggested RIF profile defined in the "Recommendation on using this rule 
>interchange format in combination with OWL" deliverable.

1. I don't follow how this would allow RIF to omit a human usable syntax.
2. I don't read the above comments as putting this proposed goal in opposition
with the requirement for multiple formal semantics (and thus the wide coverage 
FCS).  This is because the profile for SW can select a small set of 
recommended semantics, even if RIF supports more.


-Evan

Evan Wallace
Manufacturing Integration Systems Division
NIST

Received on Thursday, 8 June 2006 21:33:33 UTC