- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 18:33:12 -0400
- To: "Gerd Wagner" <wagnerg@tu-cottbus.de>
- Cc: "'Christopher Welty'" <welty@us.ibm.com>, "'Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
> > To prepare, please try to use the XML syntax to encode some
> > rules. If you
> > find you need something that is not in the syntax, please
> > note it and be prepared to discuss it.
>
> Of course, everyone will easily find many things that are
> "not in the syntax", because the proposed syntax covers only
> a minimum core (and is in this limited form not useful for any
> real interchange).
>
> > If the syntax is acceptable (it has been there
> > for some time), we will decide at this telecon to accept it
> > as our syntax.
>
> What do you mean with "our syntax"? Clearly this core syntax
> proposal will have to be extended/modified in many ways.
> Especially typing of terms and atoms will be an essential
> issue for any practical interchange (as we have experienced
> in our REWERSE research project on rule modeling and markup
> http://rewerse.net/I1/).
I'm sure Chris meant his terms to be understood in the context of the
current Working Group situation -- namely being in Phase 1. So the
phrase, "If you find you need something that is not in the syntax"
means, "If you need the Phase 1 syntax to be different from this", etc.
The question might be rephrased: does the proposed syntax work as an
extensible base?
-- Sandro
Received on Saturday, 14 October 2006 22:33:37 UTC