Re: Issue formulation

I am not sure about the round-tripping issue, but I think it is not a problem.


	--michael  

> Michael Kifer wrote:
> > I was supposed to send around a formulation for the issue about the
> > disjointness of predicates/functions/constants. Here is goes:
> > 
> > Issue: Should the names for predicates, functions, and constants be
> > 	distinct in RIF Core? This constraint will be allowed to be removed
> > 	in RIF dialects.
> 
> Short opinion on that:
> 
> Since this is only about names and these can be syntactically 
> disambiguated in RIF core whether they denote functions or predicates of 
> particular arity...
> 
>   It seems that any system which cannot deal with having the same 
> pred/funct symbol used in several places could disambiguate
> 
>   p(p(p,p),q)
> 
> as:
> 
> pred2_p(func2_p(func0_p,func0_p),func0_q)
> 
> by simple preprocessing in its RIF wrapper. For RIF Core this should not 
> be a problem, or no? If this is true, I am in favor of not imposing this 
> restriction in core.
> 
> just my two cents,
> 
> axel
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Axel Polleres
> email: axel@polleres.net  url: http://www.polleres.net/
> 
> 
> 

Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2007 09:57:44 UTC