- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@urjc.es>
- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 23:13:13 +0200
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>, Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote: > On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 16:53 +0200, Christian de Sainte Marie wrote: > [...] > >>But I do not understand what using a "holds" predicate would add (I >>guess it is related to the semantics of a RDF triple, but how?). > > > It allows semantics of RDFS and some of OWL to be expressed in RIF > rules, as I explained in my message of 25 Sep 2006 > > Re: [RIF] Extensible Design: Horn semantics and syntax... RDF/OWL > integration conventions > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Sep/0073.html > > Here's a sketch of an entailment test case. > > Premises: > > In an RDF/OWL/turtle document: > ex:bob ex:loves ex:cheese. > ex:loves rdfs:subPropertyOf ex:likes. > > In a RIF document: > holds(rdfs:subPropertyOf, ?p, ?q) /\ holds(?p, ?s ?o) > => holds(?q, ?s ?o) (How) is this different from CONSTRUCT {?s ?q ?o} WHERE { ?p rdfs:subPropertyOf ?q. ?s ?p ?o } ? ... I mean, I know that it is different, but my problem is more the following: In what *context* is the inferred triple true? What is the context of the body triples what is the context of head triples here? thanks, axel > Conclusion: > in turtle: > ex:bob ex:likes ex:cheese. > and/or perhaps in RIF: > holds(ex:likes, ex:bob, ex:cheese) > > Does the issues list cover the deliverable "on using this rule > interchange format in combination with OWL"? Ah yes... > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/products/8 > > Currently no actions/issues there. I suggest the holds predicate > issue should go there. Shall I add it? I don't see documentation > of who is supposed to raise new issues. > > > -- Dr. Axel Polleres email: axel@polleres.net url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2006 21:16:38 UTC