Re: RDF and (a subsets of) F-Logic

Jos de Bruijn <jos.debruijn@deri.org> writes:
> 
> At the last face-to-face meeting I mentioned that there is a direct
> semantic correspondence between RDF triples and data molecules of the
> form a[b->>c] in F-Logic.
> 
> Find attached a paper which describes an embedding of RDF(S) in F-Logic,
> and presents several results. We also present an extension of RDF with
> rules, and, in general, arbitrary theories.
> 
> For the members of this working group, the results on the embedding in
> Theorem 1 and Corollary 1, and the extension in Definition 4, with the
> result in Theorem 5, would be the most interesting.
> 
> If we would want to adopt this embedding/extension in RIF, we might want
> to rename "molecule" to "triple", and syntax-wise we might choose
> something like NTriples for representing the statements.

We are going to have "slotted" syntax in WD2. Why do we need Ntriples?

Also, at the f2f we discussed that OWL uses RDF data, but strictly
separates individuals from concepts.
Just wanted to point out that sorts can give us a way to do that also.
Simply require appropriate signatures for the subclassOf, memberOf
relationships, and also for the attributes of objects (i.e., rolesd).


	--michael

Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2007 21:52:08 UTC