FormalLanguageVsProse

Hmmm have just been discussing

5 Good Practice E:  Use formal languages and define which from prose and 
formal languages has priority.


wiki topic:
http://esw.w3.org/topic/FormalLanguageVsProse


with a colleague .. (note this is not a formal comment, merely discussion).

We've had quite a few discussions in SW where there are two 
formal/semi-formal descriptions ...

RDF Semantics:
   Model Theoretic
vs Inference Rules

OWL Semantics
    DL Model Theory
or RDF Compatible Model Theory

apparantly in DAWG/SPARQL
    - declarative explanation of optionals
  or  procedural explanation of optionals

I have at least found it arguable that both should be normative, since 
any divergence between the two is a bug in the spec that needs fixing, 
and until you see the bug you can't decide which part will change.

Another consideration is that often the reason for having two is that 
the more abstract version (e.g. a model theory, or a declarative 
expalanation) is the more natural place for the WG to make its 
decisions, whereas the more concrete version (inference rules or a 
procedure) is what implementors will use.

Most people seem to have been more comfortable with making a decision 
for one or the other to have priority than saying that deviation between 
the two is a bug.

Jeremy

Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2005 14:22:02 UTC