RE: Scope

I imagine there's room for both concepts of negation and I'd hope that
if/when rdf gets the necesary logical additions, it will be able to express
both.

I do agree that many real world applications will accept non-monotonicity in
exchange for performance and just deal with it via concepts of entrenchment,
etc. That's one reason provenance support will be important (and a good
reason to use quads instead of triples).

Geoff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Wagner, G.R.
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 5:44 AM
> To: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Scope
>
>
> [Geoff Chappell]
> > We've developed a query and inference server for RDF that
> > runs on Win32 called RDF Gateway. For those of you who
> > haven't seen it, it's an rdf-based deductive database
> > with a SQL-like query language.
> > ...
> > We support AND, OR, NOT (negation as failure), ...
>
> Your approach shows the significance of the RDBMS/SQL
> paradigm for any inference-based query answering system.
> A query and inference server for RDF should basically
> provide at least as much expressivity/functionality as
> a SQL-DB server (including negation-as-failure, as
> opposed to the views of the "conservatives" on this list).
>
> -Gerd

Received on Thursday, 8 November 2001 07:59:12 UTC