- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:26:41 +0200
- To: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 30 April 2009 16:27:31 UTC
It turns out that the earlier definition of safeness I contrived is not very extensible. And as you may have noticed, it's not all that easy to understand. Also, it precluded the use of "output" variables of external predicates to be used as inputs for other externals. So, I came up with a new definition that addresses these issues: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Core#Safeness Please have a look. The new definition uses a kind of normalization to deal with disjunction and defines the notion of equivalence classes for variables to deal with equality. So, I needed some additional preliminary definitions, but the definition of safeness itself is more straightforward. I will now work on the extension with strong safeness, which should not be too hard. Jos
Received on Thursday, 30 April 2009 16:27:31 UTC