Re: open issues in RIF-BLD, RIF-RDF: metadata, built-ins

The proposal in [2] is not quite clear to me. If I understand it correctly,
it is not sufficiently flexible.
Moreover, I do not understand why are you talking about external data sets
and not about external rulesets. A data set is a special case of a rule
set.


	--michael  


> i) Metadata in RIF / referring to external data sets, RDF
> ===
> it has long been recognized that RIF needs a mechanism for specifying
> metadata.  In addition, the current proposal for referring to external
> data sets and data models [2] relies on metadata for this reference.
> However, the BLD language does not have it.  I propose adding adding
> metadata to the language as soon as possible.
> Additionally, the working group needs to agree on the mechanism and
> vocabulary to use for referring to external data sets. Personally, I am
> fine with following the proposal in [2]. Fortunately, this is also on
> the agenda for today's telephone conference :-)
> 
> I really think these issues need to be resolved before the publication
> of the next working draft.
> 
.....
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Sep/0001.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/Data_Sets
> [3]
> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/RDF#head-cb9271092ef7391c51020efbc1900dfc64edbd08
> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jul/0030.html
> [5] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/List_of_functions_and_operators
> [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jul/0038.html
> -- 
> Jos de Bruijn            debruijn@inf.unibz.it
>                       http://www.debruijn.net/

Received on Saturday, 8 September 2007 07:03:44 UTC