RE: [RIF] Extensible Design

> > Hopefully there can be many modules shared between 
> > dialects, where both the syntax and semantics are 
> > shared. I'm not sure if it'll ever make sense to share 
> > syntax but not semantics for some part of a language.
> 
> Well, it seems to me that the proposal by Boley et al 
> advocates precisely this view. My reading of the 
> proposal is that several (perhaps many) RIF dialects 
> will share the same syntax (or very similar syntaxes) 
> for conditions but will diverge on semantics.

Let me try to elaborate on this observation:

1) The RIF family will consist of several branches
of dialects, most of which overlap in their condition
language. Each branch will have a core, which
defines the common syntax and semantics of the branch.
Extensions of this core define additional syntax and
semantics.

2) Most RIF dialects will not only share the syntax
but also the semantics of conditions (except for
normative/integrity rules, which do, in general, not 
have conditions).

3) Data literals, object names, function symbols
and predicate symbols may be typed. Using suitable
predicate/atom types, this allows to represent RDF 
and OWL rules directly (and not only via a "query 
interface").

-Gerd

Received on Thursday, 4 May 2006 20:32:24 UTC