- From: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:26:04 -0700
- To: kifer@cs.sunysb.edu
- CC: "'RIF WG'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
I think a better solution is for PRD to support Skolem functions (logical functions that occur only in the conclusion), thus carving out a slightly larger Core. Michael Kifer wrote: > Apropos: we talked about _new (a.k.a. Skolem) for BLD use cases, but never > decided anything. Should we try to put it in for the last call? > > > --michael > > > On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:52:28 -0700 > Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com> wrote: > > >> Adrian Paschke wrote: >> >>> It can not be simulated by a retract action followed by a new assert, >>> because if PRD has a negation (not) the retract might trigger a production >>> rule transition. But that is not the intended semantics of assign/update. >>> >>> >> what I meant was to add Assign to the definition of the transition >> relation ?__RIF-PRD ? /P(W)/ × /L/ × /P(W)/ defined in Section 3.3 of >> the PRD spec. Assign would be defined as a single transition, not as >> pair of (retract, assert) transitions. >> >> Section 3.3 (and associated syntax section) needs some work in any >> case. There is no way to do what OBR calls "assert new", which means to >> create a new frame with a brand new OID. The existing PRD assert can >> only take an existing frame and add a slot to it. >> Also, in OBR and in Jess, Retract would not take a frame argument, but >> rather would take an OID and would retract all the frames that match >> that OID. >>
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2008 20:28:15 UTC