RE: mappings between SWRL and Boley proposal

> But, OK, here is a sketch of my proposal:
> 
> 3/ Either RDF or OWL can be used to provide information.  

Can or must? If it's just an option to use them, what
else may be used?
 
> 4/ The semantics is a model-theoretic semantics similar to 
> the semantics of RDF or OWL. 

I think this is too narrow to be feasible for RIF.
We want to accommodate RDF and OWL, but we don't want
to be bound to it.
 
> 5/ Compliance for formalism X will be measured as follows:
>    a/ Partial mappings will be provided between the syntaxes 
> of X and the
>       RIF, including mappings between X's data language and 
> RDF or OWL.
>    b/ A subset of the RIF will be identified as being X-compliant.

I think that also for the target language X, a matching subset 
will have to be identified.

>    c/ For that subset the deductive behaviour of X must 
> "mirror" reasoning in the RIF.
 
It seems that the essential disagreement between your proposal
and our proposal is point 4/. We basically agree on all other
points.

-Gerd

Received on Friday, 19 May 2006 09:29:19 UTC