Re: Urgent: Issue with RIF-Core EBNF Grammar?

Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org> wrote on 11/05/2010 19:49:27:
> 
> The point is: if the membership facts don't "materialise" in RIF, 
> how can any rule with a membership assertion in the body ever fire...?
> (maybe that view is too operational)

Why should they "materialize" in RIF? The only place where you need them 
to "materialize" is where you implement your RIF rules!

That RIF cannot represent facts does not mean that the environment, or 
even the rule language, in which you implement the rules recovered from a 
RIF document cannot either.

Thus, you can import the rules from RIF into your inference engine, and 
the facts from somewhere else. Actually, I would expect that this is the 
case in most usage scenarios.

Does that make sense?

Christian

IBM
9 rue de Verdun
94253 - Gentilly cedex - FRANCE
Tel. +33 1 49 08 35 00
Fax +33 1 49 08 35 10


Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
Compagnie IBM France
Siege Social : 17 avenue de l'Europe, 92275 Bois-Colombes Cedex
RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
Capital Social : 611.451.766,20 ?
SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 03644