- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:28:32 -0400
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Cc: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:42:26 +0100 Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org> wrote: > > Michael Kifer wrote: > > As we discussed (a few months) earlier, binding patterns have no meaning > > outside of a particular evaluation algorithm (procedural semantics). > > I remember well, but as long as this is not contradicting with the > existing semantics - I guess for core, we can kind of assume a standard > forward-chaining evaluation procedure, which only makes sense to me with > binding patterns and safety - I see no problem with this. How did you "guessed" that? :-) Why is it that in the core we can make such assumptions? Furthermore, this makes sense only for some *particular* forward chaning strategies and for particular backward chaining ones. > > It is > > therefore not clear how to incorporate them in the current spec, which is > > supposed to be independent of the procedural things. > > It would be only a part of the core dialect specification, which is just > a syntactic restriction of BLD with the exact same semantics as BLD. > Would you see a problem with that? I don't see how this can be useful. If this is part of a spec then everybody is supposed to implement it, no? The core should be implemented by everyone, so I dont think this is good. michael > > Axel > > > michael > > > > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:31:08 +0100 > > Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org> wrote: > > > >> (put the subject under a [Core] label.) > >> > >> Binding patterns were mentioned a view times today, I thus try to > >> reformulate here a definition, which may be a helpful starting point > >> helpful in this context and which : > >> > >> An external predicate with external schema > >> > >> ( X_1,....,X_n; pred(X_1,....,X_n) ) > >> > >> is assigned with one or more binding patterns, where a binding pattern > >> is a vector {in,out}^n: > >> > >> Any external predicate provides a way for deciding the truth value of an > >> output tuple depending on the extension of a set of input predicates and > >> terms. External predicates have a fixed interpretation assigned for > >> their intended domains. The distinction between input and output terms > >> is made in order to guarantee that whenever all input values of one of > >> the given binding patterns are bound to concrete values, the fixed > >> interpretation only allows a finite number of bindings for the output > >> values such that the predicate evaluates to true, and those finite set > >> of bindings which can be computed by an external evaluation oracle. > >> > >> If we agree to add something like binding patterns to DTB, I could start > >> to "collect" the possible binding patterns for the DTB predicates. > >> > >> Side remark: note that external functions don't need binding patterns > >> (obviously all parameters are 'in' and the only 'out' is the result.) > >> > >> Axel Polleres wrote: > >>> Two pointers here... the notion of strong safety in hex-programs [1,2] > >>> and Topor's considerations on safe database queries with arithmetics > >>> [3] (cudos jos for the latter one) > >>> > >>> > >>> 1. R. Schindlauer. Answer-Set Programming for the Semantic Web. PhD > >>> thesis, Vienna University of Technology, Dec. 2006. > >>> http://www.kr.tuwien.ac.at/staff/roman/papers/thesis.pdf > >>> > >>> 2. Thomas Eiter, Giovambattista Ianni, Roman Schindlauer, and Hans > >>> Tompits. Effective Integration of Declarative Rules with External > >>> Evaluations for Semantic Web Reasoning. In York Sure and John Domingue, > >>> editors, Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Semantic Web > >>> (ESWC 2006), Budva, Montenegro, number 4011 in Lecture Notes in Computer > >>> Science (LNCS), pages 273-287. Springer, June 2006. > >>> http://www.springerlink.com/content/f0x23wx142141v44/ > >>> > >>> 3. R. Topor. Safe database queries with arithmetic relations (1991) > >>> Proc. 14th Australian Computer Science Conf > >>> http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.48.4845 > >>> > >>> > >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 13 August 2008 18:29:22 UTC