Re: resolutions

Francis McCabe wrote:
> How about Rule Ontology?

Of course, though that's presumably already in progress with RIFRAF.
Dave

> On Nov 11, 2006, at 9:56 AM, Dave Reynolds wrote:
> 
>>
>> Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> Chris posted the resultions to the wiki:
>>>   http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/F2F4
>>> (posted for him, since his e-mail isn't working.)
>>
>> Whilst not a resolution, another outcome of the meeting for me was the 
>> realization/suggestion that RIF needs a library of components that can 
>> be reused across dialects. This would include:
>>
>>   - syntax components
>>     (within the extensible syntax framework)
>>
>>   - metadata vocabulary elements
>>     (including the compatibility categories, and native<->RIF mapping
>>      metadata)
>>
>>   - selected datatypes
>>     (we have already selected XSD but haven't spelled out the
>>      precise subset to be supported)
>>
>>   - associated datatype functions
>>     (presumably drawn from XQuery functions and operators)
>>
>> Since the terminology "core" has already been taken we need a name for 
>> this "shared RIF stuff". RIFLib? RIF Vocabulary?
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
> 

Received on Monday, 13 November 2006 08:39:11 UTC