- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:55:52 +0200
- To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <49EDD068.9010909@inf.unibz.it>
Dave Reynolds wrote: > Look like good proposals. So you do not have a problem with the slight change in the semantics of RDF lists (in combinations) implied by the proposal? > > My assumption is that we'd want the one-to-one mapping but that's to be > discussed I guess. The argument against the one-to-one mapping is that it's harder to implement. I believe you cannot implement it in a rule system that does not support function symbols, unless you have specific machinery for manipulating the RDF list structures while you manipulate the RIF structures: the construction of an RIF list implies the existence of a bunch of objects used for the structure of the RDF list. By the way, I believe that even the "RIF lists as extensions" is not so straightforward to implement, especially when using the RDFS semantics. You can do things like creating sub properties of rdf:first, and so you cannot read the structure of the lists from the syntax of the graph. For embedding this semantics (in the appendix of this specification) I was thinking of restricting the use of rdf:first, rdf:rest, and rdf:nil in combinations, so that the RIF lists can simply be constructed from the RDF lists in the graphs. > > Minor comment: > The phrasing of the additional semantic condition (9) uses the term > "identifies". Most RDF lists are constructed with blank nodes for which > "identify" seems like the wrong term. I think is just an editorial > rather than a substantive remark. I changed it to "refers to". Jos > > Dave > > Jos de Bruijn wrote: >> At the face-to-face, there seemed to be some support for connecting RDF >> lists and RIF lists in RDF-RIF combinations. I believe this can be done >> by suitably extending the semantics of this combinations. The following >> wiki page lists two possible extensions that both seem somehow >> reasonable. Note that in both extensions the semantics of RDF lists is >> slightly restricted: we cannot allow the same element to identify two >> different lists. This is illustrated by the test cases on the same wiki >> page: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF-RDF-Lists >> >> >> >> >> Best, Jos >> > > -- +43 1 58801 18470 debruijn@inf.unibz.it Jos de Bruijn, http://www.debruijn.net/ ---------------------------------------------- Many would be cowards if they had courage enough. - Thomas Fuller
Received on Tuesday, 21 April 2009 13:56:33 UTC