- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 15:51:16 +0200
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4836CBD4.9090909@inf.unibz.it>
I'm afraid that adding existentials to rule heads pushes the language outside of Horn. In fact, we would nearly have full first-order logic (the only thing that is missing is destruction); not a rule language. Adding conjunction to rule heads is not a problem, because conjunctions can be split into several rules with atomic formulas in the heads. Best, Jos Sandro Hawke wrote: > In planning to implement RIF for N3, the two extensions I mostly need > are to allow existentials and conjunctions in the the rule consequents. > These are straightforward extensions, with nice fallback rewrites, but I > thought I would just raise the question of putting them directly in BLD. > > I note, in particular, that Production Rule systems want something very > much like existentials in the consequent, too, so this might possibly > even go into Core. But maybe it's not exactly the same thing, and > datalog certainly doesn't have it. > > I'm fine working with this as just an extension, but I thought I should > at least raise the issue in case anyone else is sympathetic. > > - Sandro > -- debruijn@inf.unibz.it Jos de Bruijn, http://www.debruijn.net/ ---------------------------------------------- One man that has a mind and knows it can always beat ten men who haven't and don't. -- George Bernard Shaw
Received on Friday, 23 May 2008 13:52:15 UTC