- From: Geoff Chappell <geoff@sover.net>
- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:34:55 -0400
- To: <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>, "Mike Dean" <mdean@bbn.com>
Looks interesting. A few questions after reading the spec. What's the thinking behind must- vs. may-bind? I gather this isn't altering the result at all, but just telling the server its options when returning the results to the client. Is that right? I can see the utility of bind vs no-bind but why is it necessary/desirable to distinguish between must and may? Is it allowable to pass an empty answer KB pattern if a query premise is included? seem this might be useful for dumb clients that want to bounce their data + queries off of a query server. Thanks, Geoff Chappell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Dean" <mdean@bbn.com> To: <daml-all@daml.org>; <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>; <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>; <seweb-list@cs.vu.nl> Cc: <joint-committee@daml.org> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 5:56 PM Subject: DAML Query Language (August 2002) released > > The Joint US/EU ad hoc Agent Markup Language Committee [1] > is pleased to announce the initial release [2] of the DAML > Query Language (DQL). DQL provides a language and protocol > for agent-to-agent query-answering dialogues using knowledge > represented in DAML+OIL (March 2001) [3], potentially > involving inference and remote knowledge bases. > > The current release consists of an abstract specification. > Continuing work is expected to result in a normative > external syntax and a fully defined specification of answer > justifications. > > Please direct comments to joint-committee@daml.org. > > Mike > > [1] http://www.daml.org/committee/ > > [2] http://www.daml.org/2002/08/dql/ > > [3] http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-index
Received on Friday, 30 August 2002 09:04:51 UTC