- From: Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:27:46 +0100
- To: "'Leora Morgenstern'" <leora@cs.nyu.edu>, "'Chris Welty'" <cawelty@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'Public-Rif-Wg'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Hi Leora, Since you started editing on UCR I have added you to the editors list of the document: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/UCR I have looked at your restructuring of UCR which now lists the use cases for the three existing dialects BLD, PRD and FLD. I'm not sure if that is what we initially intended UCR for. The use cases which we selected from the 50 members submissions and which we further detailed in the UCR document where intended to demonstrate the need and usability of a W3C RIF standard in general. For those use cases which can be already formalized with the existing RIF dialects I had added code examples and respective buttons to show/hide them, in order to "to provide a reference to the design of RIF and a guide for users and implementers to the current technical specifications of RIF dialects." (see http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/UCR#Introduction) I remember that we discussed in the working group that we remove all code examples from use cases which currently cannot be represented with the existing RIF dialects, e.g. because they require some expressive logical formalism such as event calculus. However we said we want to keep these use cases for the following reason (see http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/UCR#Introduction): "RIF-UCR also delivers a structured context for formulating future technical specifications of further RIF dialects. Each dialect targets at a cluster of similar rule languages and enables platform-independent interoperation between them (via interchange of RIF rules). The presented use cases illustrate some of the principal ways in which RIF can provide benefits." I think this second point of reference is important for RIF as an interchange format in general. Another problem with the restructuring into BLD, PRD, and FLD use cases is that some of them can be represented in both BLD and PRD. I remember we had long discussion about the business rule use cases which can be represented in both BLD and PRD, and the presentation syntax for rules using ":-" "->" or "<--". The new structure might suggest that you cannot represent it in the other dialect. For instance, use case 4.1. can be represented in BLD and PRD: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/UCR#Negotiating_eBusiness_Contracts_Across _Rule_Platforms So I think we should change it back to the original structure and just update the code examples to the latest syntax from the latest dialect specification. For those use cases which cannot be represented yet with the existing RIF dialects we can add a note. Since new dialects are on their way, such as a logic dialect with negation, some of them can be represented, soon. Best, Adrian -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] Im Auftrag von Leora Morgenstern Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. März 2010 14:42 An: Chris Welty Cc: Public-Rif-Wg Betreff: Re: Next few weeks in RIF Chris, Thanks for the reminder. I did some re-organizing of the document in the summer and fall, dividing the use cases into BLD, PRD, and FLD. In some cases, the division was mandatory (e.g., there is at least one case that must be done in FLD because it makes explicit reference to the concept of belief); but there were some cases that could go either way (e.g., some cases seem more naturally expressed in PRD although they could probably be represented in BLD.) I also put in a bunch of editors' notes as a reminder to myself of work that I still need to do, specifically translating cases into the required dialect, making notation consistent, etc. I am booked solid this week and traveling next week, but can get to this the week of March 14th, and would aim to finish within a week from that time. Best regards, Leora On Mon, March 1, 2010 2:51 pm, Chris Welty wrote: > > RIFWG, > > We'd like to make a push for the next few weeks to get ready for > transition. We have some decisions to make, some work to do on the > documents, etc. > > So, we will resume weekly telecons for about a month, starting tomorrow. > > What is the status of the "other" documents, should we change or update > them? Are they in their final form? > > UCR: Leora? > XML-data: Christian? > OWL2/RL: Dave? > Overview: Michael? > Test: Stella? > > -CC&S > > -- > Dr. Christopher A. Welty IBM Watson Research Center > +1.914.784.7055 19 Skyline Dr. > cawelty@gmail.com Hawthorne, NY 10532 > http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty > > -- Leora Morgenstern, Ph.D. http://www-formal.stanford.edu/leora 646.872.7269
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2010 15:28:22 UTC