- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:41:03 +0100
- To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
On Jul 3, 2007, at 10:24 PM, Dave Reynolds wrote: [snip] > I claim that an "interesting" range of uses of rules on the > semantic web can be covered by function-free horn rules. > > My evidence for this is: > (a) both N3 rules and JenaRules seem to get significant use [*] > (b) a number of SWRL users (though by no means all) who turn up > on jena-dev seem to only be looking to implement the "rule bit" of > SWRL without the OWL entailments > (c) specific uses cases such as the vocabulary translation use > case (UC8) are covered by this Just to add a bit for reference (I'm also not advocating anything; just informing): DL Safe SWRL rules (SWRL rules with variables ranging only over named individuals in the KB) have multiple implementation in OWL reasoners, with the best one being KAON2, but with Racer's and Pellet's implementations under active development. (The new hypertableaux work suggests that even more robust implementations are on the way.) At OWLED 2007, there was a task force to produce a "report" on DL Safe rules: http://code.google.com/p/owl1-1/wiki/SafeRules (We're still getting the task force structure together.) Perhaps the most salient point there is that in the next year there will be some serious education and evangelism centered on DL Safe rules. I did a preliminary and sadly neglected coding of feature requests and discussions in the OWLED papers: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pTmcCXR-dV6TdDo24Tse-fQ As you can see SWRL or DL safe rules occurred in 9 papers...by far the majority. Now, these users are often quite confused about what SWRL is, for example, so it's hard to say what they really want and even harder to say what they need. The strongest thing I'd personally say is that there will be multiple implementations of DL Safe SWRL rules in owl engines which will want to exchange rulesets with each other and with other systems as appropriate. I believe that the user base will be pretty happy with that. (This, of course, says nothing specific about what "goes into" Core.) > This subset of Core is implementable in both production rule and LP > settings. [snip] I thought a sticking point was recursion? Hope this helps. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2007 21:41:25 UTC