- From: Boley, Harold <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
- Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:35:33 -0400
- To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>, <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
The following version of it seems to be best for Phase 1 convergence: 1. Allow metadata, syntactically, on four scope-like objects, via a <meta> child element which is legal on these capitalized (class) elements that create natural scopes: * Document * Group * Forall * Exists No need for wrapper elements. In a normal rule, the Forall is where you'd hang metadata. You can also give metadata to the complementary Exists for conditions (queries and constraints). The PS for the additional metadata-enriched elements is easy: 'Forall' IRIMETA? Var* '(' CLAUSE ')' 'Exists' IRIMETA? Var* '(' FORMULA ')' 2. Keep the Group element, for making these conceptual groupings that, e.g., Michael speaks of (and, e.g., Sandro is familiar with from his rule programming), where metadata apply to a set of rules). This works nicely for both BLD and FLD (Forall's CLAUSE becomes FORMULA). -- Harold -----Original Message----- From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sandro Hawke Sent: April 22, 2008 4:37 PM To: public-rif-wg@w3.org Subject: where to hang the metadata? Thinking over today's difficult discussion about metadata, it seems to me that the right solution is this: 1. Allow metadata, syntactically, on every object, by way of a <meta> child element which is legal on every capitalized (class) element. No need for wrapper elements. In a normal rule, the "Forall" is where you'd hang the metadata. I have some ideas for the PS, but no favorites. 2. Add a "group" element, for making these conceptual groupings that Michael speaks of (and I'm familiar with from my own rule programming), where the metadata applies to a set of a few rules). What about this approach would be so bad? -- Sandro
Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 02:36:23 UTC