- From: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:28:06 -0700
- To: W3C RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
I'm ok with this proposal. +1 Christian de Sainte Marie wrote: > > Christian de Sainte Marie wrote: > >> Gary Hallmark wrote: >> >>> I don't like the ability to have free variables (not scoped in a >>> forall) >> >> >> This is specifically excluded in the definition I propose. > > > Actually, I got carried away with the argument, when I proposed the > "footnote" to require that all variables MUST be within the scope of a > forall. > > What had been discussed, and on which there was a consensus, is that > quantifiers must be explicit in RIF; that is, that "concrete" rule > languages that allow implicit ones would have to make them explicit in > RIF. There was consensus on that [1] at the telecon 17Oct06 [3] and > Harold announced that he had modified the draft accordingly at the > telecon 24Oct06 [4]. > > So, I corrected my proposal to reflect that consensus and nothing more > [5] ([6]is the diff with previous version). > > Cheers, > > Christian > > [1] Without a formal resolution, though. The only resolution I found > on the Horn Rule abstract syntax is from F2F5, to "use diagram in [2] > in Core WD1, labeled "stillo under discussion". > > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Feb/0134 > > [3] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Oct/att-0098/2006-10-17-rif-minutes.html#item04 > > > [4] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Oct/att-0104/meeting-2006-10-24.html#item04 > > > [5] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Core/Horn_Rules_Alternative > > [6] > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Core/Horn_Rules_Alternative?action=diff&rev2=12&rev1=7 > > > -- Oracle <http://www.oracle.com> Gary Hallmark | Architect | +1.503.525.8043 Oracle Server Technologies 1211 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 800 Portland, OR 97204
Received on Friday, 15 June 2007 21:46:02 UTC