- From: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:29:09 +0100
- To: Changhai Ke <cke@ilog.fr>
- CC: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Changhai, Changhai Ke wrote: > > I hope we can reserve an opportunity to discuss about the precise names > for the tags. Agreed. The paragraph after the "keyword" rif:standardForward is first used says: <<Editor's Note: Name of the standard CR strategy to be discussed and agreed upon... standardForward used here as a placeholder.>> > Your main point here is that the "so called keyword" is in fact a value > for an XML tag, and this is very good. My proposal for the name (for the > value of the tag) is to call it "forward chaining" or "inference". (But > please avoid "standard", it may give arise to additional thoughts). I did not use rif:forwardChaining as a place holder, because there are many variants to forward chaining. The one we selected seems to be the simplest and (maybe?) the most standard one: hence standardForward. But I am not really attached to any special name, esp. for a flag for use in basically unreadable XML documents: if somebody insisted, rif:whatTheF*** would work just as fine with me :-) Cheers, Christian
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 18:29:56 UTC