- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 21:33:58 +0100
- To: Christian De Sainte Marie <csma@fr.ibm.com>
- Cc: "RIF" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On 11 May 2010, at 19:10, Christian De Sainte Marie wrote: > > 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? I see your point, if that was the intention and is not a problem to anyone else, I guess I can live with it. Axel > > 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 >
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2010 20:34:34 UTC