- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 11:39:44 -0400
- To: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>
- Cc: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>, Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@biotec.tu-dresden.de>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:44:37 -0400
Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com> wrote:
> Syntax for named arguments to use '('Name TERM)')' instead of (Name '->' TERM)
> Syntax for frames to use TERM '::' TERM instead of TERM '->' TERM
> Syntax for member to use TERM 'TY' TERM instead of TERM '#' TERM
> Syntax for subclass to us TERM 'SC' TERM instaed of TERM '##' TERM
You are proposing to replace perfectly good syntax with ugly alternatives.
CSMA's proposal for using Name = Term is bad because it misleadingly suggests
that there is only one value for Name, but in fact the value of Name is a set
and Term is just one of the values in a set.
If you want to overhaul the syntax and free up -> for (classical) implication,
then let's use something that mnemonically makes sense:
a isa b
c subclassOf cc or c sub cc
name hasValue val or name hasVal val
etc.
We should use a different sign for rule implication both in BLD and in PRD.
That should be => <= and not -> <- (provided that we agree on the overall
overhaul).
--michael
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 16:12:10 UTC