- From: David Allsopp <d.allsopp@signal.qinetiq.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 09:16:26 +0100
- CC: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
Pat Hayes wrote: > >The reason calling the trigger a query made sense to me is that I > >visualise the situation as follows: > >I have a rule engine and set of rules. There is a separate knowledge > >base of assertions somewhere, on disk or on the network. 'I' (the rule > >engine) know that (P implies Q). But has P been asserted, and can I > >therefore infer Q? That's in the knowledge base, so I have to *query* > >the knowledge base in order to tell whether P has been *asserted*. > > OK,I see what you mean. But you have missed out a step. You (the rule > engine) query the KB: you say > P? > to the KB. Presumably, the KB gives you an answer, which is an > assertion (not a query): > P > (or maybe 'yes', which has the same content when given as an answer > to your query;) > and then you take *that answer* and run the rule on it: > P and (P implies Q) > to get the assertion > Q. > But its the output *from* the KB that triggers the rule, not your > query *to* it. If the KB had said 'no', the rule wouldn't have been > triggered, right? Yes, absolutely. Regards, David Allsopp. -- /d{def}def/u{dup}d[0 -185 u 0 300 u]concat/q 5e-3 d/m{mul}d/z{A u m B u m}d/r{rlineto}d/X -2 q 1{d/Y -2 q 2{d/A 0 d/B 0 d 64 -1 1{/f exch d/B A/A z sub X add d B 2 m m Y add d z add 4 gt{exit}if/f 64 d}for f 64 div setgray X Y moveto 0 q neg u 0 0 q u 0 r r r r fill/Y}for/X}for showpage
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2001 04:17:30 UTC