- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:42:15 -0500
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
> > I find the formulation > > > > Implies > > head: LitForm > > body: Condit > > > > makes it much more clear that "head" and "body" name the roles that the > > parts of the implication statement play. > > Ah; that's a good illustration. > > Like Michael (13 Nov 2006 20:21:21 +0100) I'm happy to use turtle, > I'm beginning to see your point. I am not against a frame notation like the above. But in my view this has to do with an ontology of rule parts rather than with the syntax. When we do XML syntax I don't think it is useful to get out of our way to emphasize that the head and the body can come in any order. In fact, this is useless and harmful, IMO. --michael
Received on Monday, 13 November 2006 22:42:37 UTC