Re: RDF (and OWL) compatibility

> continuing the discussion that was started at the end of F2F, the RDF
> compatibility document makes no sense unless it is preceded by a clear
> explanation of how the exchange of rules that use RDF is supposed to happen.

I agree.  I was originally hoping that the architecture document would
provide such an explanation, but this has not happened so far.
I will draft such an explanation in the compatibility section of the BLD
document.


best, Jos

> You mentioned two possibilities, where one requires the combined semantics
> and the other the embedding. You have to spell them out clearly.
> Without such a clear statement it is hard to tell which part of the rif-rdf
> document is to be made normative.
> 
> 
> 	--michael  

-- 
Jos de Bruijn            debruijn@inf.unibz.it
+390471016224         http://www.debruijn.net/
----------------------------------------------
The third-rate mind is only happy when it is
thinking with the majority. The second-rate
mind is only happy when it is thinking with
the minority. The first-rate mind is only
happy when it is thinking.
  - AA Milne