RE: [RIF] Extensible Design

> > 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).
> 
> Hmm.  I don't read this in the proposal at all.  My 
> understanding is that
> in the proposal the semantics of conditions varies between 
> FOL dialects and
> LP dialects and even varies between different LP dialects.

The proposal is focused on positive condition formulas
as a starting point. Your point is that the semantics for 
satisfaction of FOL conditions and of LP conditions 
varies because of the difference of allowing arbitary 
interpretations versus allowing only (infinite) Herbrand 
interpretations, right? 

OK, but still this is only a small variation which
you should be able to come to terms with. 

> > 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").
> 
> Again, I don't see this in the proposal.  (Not that 
> I don't think that it is a good idea, however.)

The proposal contains the following sentence: "Sorts 
can also be optionally added to function symbols and 
predicates in order to support sorted languages",
which probably should be a bit more elaborated.

-Gerd

Received on Friday, 5 May 2006 08:31:42 UTC