- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:08:22 +1000
- To: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <48CDDFB6.1060106@inf.unibz.it>
I spotted a problem with the definition of entailment in the LC document of BLD. I originally sent the message only to Michael. It is probably good to archive this issue on the public mailing list, so that we may track it. Best, Jos -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [BLD] problem with definition of entailment Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:12:11 +0200 From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it> To: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu> Michael, I found a problem with the definition of entailment in BLD. We want entailment to be defined for any formula, specifically, the entailed formula can be an arbitrary condition formula. However, you state that if a formula is not a document, then it belongs to a special query document. Now, the notion of "query document" is not defined. This is one problem. If we assume that the query document is simply a document, then we have the problem that in BLD documents cannot contain condition formulas; they can only contain facts and rules. So, in that case entailment is not defined for all condition formulas. I suspect this is an error, so I would suggest to either defined satisfaction for condition formulas or properly define the notion of "query document". Best, Jos -- Jos de Bruijn debruijn@inf.unibz.it +390471016224 http://www.debruijn.net/ ---------------------------------------------- No one who cannot rejoice in the discovery of his own mistakes deserves to be called a scholar. - Donald Foster -- 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 Monday, 15 September 2008 04:09:11 UTC