- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 05:57:02 -0400
- To: axel@polleres.net
- Cc: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
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