- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 09:33:14 -0400
- To: public-rif-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4477039A.6090905@inf.unibz.it>
A Proposal for a Unitary Language for RIF Phase 1 Peter F. Patel-Schneider Overview: 1/ The language of RIF Phase 1 is function-free Horn clauses. There is a human-readable, functional-style syntax, plus an XML interchange syntax. 2/ RIF Phase 1 includes predicates for the reasonable XML Schema datatypes, plus various built-in predicates over these datatypes. 3/ A RIF Phase 1 knowledge base is a set of RIF Phase 1 documents plus an optional set of OWL DL documents closed under OWL imports. 4/ The meaning of a RIF Phase 1 knowledge base is given by a standard model-theoretical semantics. 5/ Compliance for formalism X will be determined by the presence of a non-trivial subset of X that can be mapped into RIF Phase 1 knowledge bases in a deduction-preserving mapping. Functional-style Syntax for RIF Phase 1: This syntax is a modification of the previous proposed syntax from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Apr/0068.html Data ::= RDF typed or untyped data value Ind ::= URI Var ::= '?' name Rel ::= URI Term ::= Data | Ind | Var Atom ::= Rel '(' Term* ')' | Term '=' Term Rule ::= Atom <- Atom* Each variable in the consequent of a rule must also be present in the antecedent. XML INTERCHANGE SYNTAX TBD SEMANTICS An interpretation is an extension of an OWL DL interpretation (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/direct.html), extending the vocabulary to include RIF relation names and mapping them to tuples over R union LV. RIF relation names that are OWL DL class names, datatype names, individual-valued property names, data-valued property names, or annotation property names have the same extension as given by the appropriate part of the OWL semantics. A RIF rule is true in a RIF interpretation precisely when every mapping from variables in the rule into R union LV that makes each atom in the antecedent of the rule true in the obvious extension of the OWL DL semantics also makes the consequent in the rule true in the same way. COMPLIANCE Compliance for formalism X will be measured as follows. a/ Partial mappings will be provided between the syntaxes of X and RIF Phase 1, including mappings between X's data language and OWL DL. b/ A subset of RIF Phase 1 will be identified as being X-compliant. c/ For that subset the deductive behaviour of X must mirror reasoning in the RIF Phase 1 in the sense that ground consequences for knowledge bases in this subset are the same for RIF Phase 1 and its mapping into the syntax of X. Compliance of a rule system with RIF Phase 1 will be defined as follows. 1/ The formalism underlying the rule system must be RIF Phase 1 compliant as defined above. 2/ There must be a tool that implements the syntax mapping. 3/ There must be a comprehensive set of RIF knowledge bases for which the equivalence of deductive behaviour has been reasonably demonstrated.
A Proposal for a Unitary Language for RIF Phase 1 Peter F. Patel-Schneider Overview: 1/ The language of RIF Phase 1 is function-free Horn clauses. There is a human-readable, functional-style syntax, plus an XML interchange syntax. 2/ RIF Phase 1 includes predicates for the reasonable XML Schema datatypes, plus various built-in predicates over these datatypes. 3/ A RIF Phase 1 knowledge base is a set of RIF Phase 1 documents plus an optional set of OWL DL documents closed under OWL imports. 4/ The meaning of a RIF Phase 1 knowledge base is given by a standard model-theoretical semantics. 5/ Compliance for formalism X will be determined by the presence of a non-trivial subset of X that can be mapped into RIF Phase 1 knowledge bases in a deduction-preserving mapping. Functional-style Syntax for RIF Phase 1: This syntax is a modification of the previous proposed syntax from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Apr/0068.html Data ::= RDF typed or untyped data value Ind ::= URI Var ::= '?' name Rel ::= URI Term ::= Data | Ind | Var Atom ::= Rel '(' Term* ')' | Term '=' Term Rule ::= Atom <- Atom* Each variable in the consequent of a rule must also be present in the antecedent. XML INTERCHANGE SYNTAX TBD SEMANTICS An interpretation is an extension of an OWL DL interpretation (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/direct.html), extending the vocabulary to include RIF relation names and mapping them to tuples over R union LV. RIF relation names that are OWL DL class names, datatype names, individual-valued property names, data-valued property names, or annotation property names have the same extension as given by the appropriate part of the OWL semantics. A RIF rule is true in a RIF interpretation precisely when every mapping from variables in the rule into R union LV that makes each atom in the antecedent of the rule true in the obvious extension of the OWL DL semantics also makes the consequent in the rule true in the same way. COMPLIANCE Compliance for formalism X will be measured as follows. a/ Partial mappings will be provided between the syntaxes of X and RIF Phase 1, including mappings between X's data language and OWL DL. b/ A subset of RIF Phase 1 will be identified as being X-compliant. c/ For that subset the deductive behaviour of X must mirror reasoning in the RIF Phase 1 in the sense that ground consequences for knowledge bases in this subset are the same for RIF Phase 1 and its mapping into the syntax of X. Compliance of a rule system with RIF Phase 1 will be defined as follows. 1/ The formalism underlying the rule system must be RIF Phase 1 compliant as defined above. 2/ There must be a tool that implements the syntax mapping. 3/ There must be a comprehensive set of RIF knowledge bases for which the equivalence of deductive behaviour has been reasonably demonstrated.
Received on Friday, 26 May 2006 13:33:45 UTC