- From: Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com>
- Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 18:38:13 -0700
- To: Danny Ayers <danny@panlanka.net>
- CC: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>, info@jan-winkler.de, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Danny Ayers wrote:
>
> <- Ok on that we agree. Some process needs to operate on the
> <- <conditional> to
> <- access the truth of the situation within some context before the value is
> <- known. Sure, we can represent any relation R(<conditional>, <value>) in
> <- RDF. But, me thinks, if we try to take the extra step of
> <- saying inside the
> <- RDF "if <conditional> then <value>", without also specifying at least the
> <- class of process, and the class of context in which that statement is
> <- operational, me thinks we are kidding ourselves.
>
> generally speaking, won't <conditional> and <value> have true/false values?
> In which case the context/processing is irrelevant - if the condition's true
> then so's the consequent... (what is done with this knowledge is another
> matter)
You have guys have me really confused. Are you trying to find a way to
express a material implication relationship, or perform a programmatic
function? Turn RDF into a programming language? I don't get it. Expressing
relationships is one thing, actually acting on them is a whole different
bahoosus.
Murray
...........................................................................
Murray Altheim <mailto:altheim@eng.sun.com>
XML Technology Center
Sun Microsystems, Inc., MS MPK17-102, 1601 Willow Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025
In the evening
The rice leaves in the garden
Rustle in the autumn wind
That blows through my reed hut. -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu
Received on Sunday, 29 April 2001 04:37:50 UTC