- 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