- From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 09:23:58 -0400
- To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@mitre.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
[Roger L. Costello] > > I was just reading an article about RuleML: > > "(RuleML) Transformation rules are also useful for expressing > mathematical functions ..." > > This triggered an idea - suppose the we embed a RuleML fragment within > an OWL statement. The RuleML fragment describes how to transform, say, > miles to kilometers, e.g., > > <owlx:Transform rdf:ID="MilesToKilometers"> > <owlx:tolerance>...</owlx:tolerance> > <owlx:inputValue>...</owlx:inputValue> > <owlx:outputValue>...</owlx:outputValue> > <owlx:inputUnits rdf:resource="#Miles"/> > <owlx:outputUnits rdf:resource="#Kilometers"/> > <ruleML:trans>...</ruleML:trans> > </owlx:Transform> > > The <ruleML:trans> element contains the RuleML statements which describe > how to transform miles to kilometers. > > Looks promising to me. What do you think? Does anyone have experience > with RuleML? /Roger That might be good - if we have a more general "G" function (this goes back to my previous couple of posts) we could refer to it, otherwise use a RuleML expression. I forgot that I knew about RuleML. I never did anything with it so I have no experience either. Still, it amounts an existing ontology at least, and I gather there is software too. Cheers, Tom P
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2003 09:19:59 UTC