- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:12:49 -0400
- To: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
- Cc: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Gary, Thanks for the helpful analysis. Some comments within. On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:26:29 -0700 Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com> wrote: > One could use existential quantification in the conclusion to express > object creation: > > exists ?e And(?e#Employee ?e[empNo->?ssn salary->50000]) :- > And(?p#Person ?p[ssn->?ssn college->"MIT"]) > > Because we would like to share the same solution with BLD, we skolemize > (using "f") the above to > > And(?e#Employee ?e[empNo->?ssn salary->50000]) :- And(?p#Person > ?p[ssn->?ssn college->"MIT"] ?e=f(?p ?ssn)) > > We can limit PRD's use of logical functions to skolem functions. BLD does not have skolem functions. I remember we discussed this, but in the end you said that you do not need them, so I did not add them to avoid delaying the last call (and possibly facing objections from others, which would have delayed even further). Now that we are in the last call, I do not know whether adding such a substantial thing as a skolem can be done. Furthermore, even with Skolem functions you can create non-terminating bottom-up derivations. For instance, forall ?X exists ?Y parent(?X,?Y) :- person(?X). At today's telecon I heard that decidability for the core is a must, and Jos even said he does not see any use for function symbols. I could not add my 0.02c because I lost the Inet connection and could not unmute my phone :-( > To support removing an object, we need to be able to retract its > classification as well as remove its slots: > > Forall ?e ?sn ?sv (Do(Retract(?e#Employeee) Retract(?e[?sn->?sv]) ) :- > ?e#Employee > > Because the semantics of frames differs from the more typical Javabeans, > as mentioned above, we need to account for this difference. E.g. > consider the following rule set: > > Joe#Employee > Joe[salary->40000] > ?e[salary->?salary * 1.1] :- And(?e#Employee ?e[salary->?salary] ?salary > < 48000) > > With frame semantics, a model is Joe[salary->40000 salary->44000 > salary->48400]. With Javabean/PRD semantics, we must have a final > configuration with only Joe[salary->48400] (or maybe Joe[salary->44000] ??) It is not that the semantics of frames is different. Here we have logical rules, and this is their semantics. Using this first-order semantics you cannot retract old knowledge. This is outside not only of the core, but also BLD. --michael
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 22:13:38 UTC