- From: Gerd Wagner <wagnerg@tu-cottbus.de>
- Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 11:29:15 +0200
- To: "'Peter F. Patel-Schneider'" <pfps@inf.unibz.it>, <hak@ilog.com>
- Cc: <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
> 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