- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 09:00:37 +0100
- To: "Vincent, Paul D" <PaulVincent@fairisaac.com>
- Cc: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>, <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On May 16, 2006, at 10:46 PM, Vincent, Paul D wrote: > +1 > > [Actually, I find it worrisome that this should be questioned at all!] Well, I have some questioning. The W3C already has a plethora of languages and apis for dealing with XML...are we going to reuse them? Exactly how? What does "working with/against XML data" actually mean? (And XSLT is already a rules language...do we need to include it?) XPath integration? It's not like that we can *prevent* rules from working on something which reasonably counts as XML data. On the other hand, there's reason to be cautious in our positioning since there are other "products" at the W3C that we definitely don't want to be seen to compete with. I suspect that some sort of XPath integration would be relatively straightforward and uncontroversial (mostly), but specifying it would be seriously nontrivial (in terms of amount of work). Is this important enough to standardize as part of RIF per se? (As opposed to leaving it to idiosyncratic application/library support that is opaque to the RIF level?) How many rule languages currently have specific language level support for XML? If none, there, assuming we're about "interchange", there's nothing to do. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 17 May 2006 08:00:55 UTC