- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:58:23 -0500
- To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, www-rdf-rules@w3.org
+1 At 13:54 +0000 11/11/03, Graham Klyne wrote: >At 17:35 07/11/03 -0500, Sandro Hawke wrote: >>As Dan Brickley mentioned, we've been working on a Rules charter, too. >>Here it is: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2003/10/swre578 >> (currently at revision 1.24) > >I've been uneasily reading the thread emanating from this, and a >comment from Jeen Broekstra [1] crystalized my concerns: > >[[ >... the charter seems very open ... >]] >[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-rules/2003Nov/0048.html >(even though that comment was about the proposed query WG charter; >I have similar concerns about a standard for query.) > >I think it's too soon to be trying to standardize a "one true rules language". > >My experience of standardization efforts is that they work best when >the goal is clearly visible. Standardizing a general RDF rules >language could, I fear, be a tarpit project which becomes bogged >down by (legitimate) competing views and interests. > >I'm also not clear about what is the near-term case for an >interoperable rules language. It seems that the greater need is to >make continued progress on deploying interoperable data upon which >such languages may operate. > >I think there's plenty of scope for useful work in the area of RDF >rules, I'm just unsure about early standardization. > >If there really is a strong desire to proceed with a standardization >effort, I would suggest dramatically narrowing the scope (e.g. to >standardize a format for simple rules based on Horn Clauses), and, >if necessary, chartering multiple efforts to deal with other >requirements. > >My apologies for striking a negative note. I'll shut up now. > >#g >-- > >At 17:35 07/11/03 -0500, Sandro Hawke wrote: >>As Dan Brickley mentioned, we've been working on a Rules charter, too. >>Here it is: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2003/10/swre578 >> (currently at revision 1.24) >> >>It's still rough in places, but I think it gets the point across. >>Wording suggestions are welcome, as are questions about what is meant >>by some section or phrase. >> >>What Dan Brickley said applies here, too: >> >> Did I mention yet that it is an *early* *draft*? For >> **discussion**? Nothing is set in stone. Specifically, we >> haven't proposed anything yet to W3C's Advisory Committee, and >> they've not approved anything. >> >> [The draft] will quite possibly change over the coming weeks, >> so please be sure to cite the $Revision number from the >> 'Status' section. >> >>I'll try to follow any discussion between now and the 20th, and update >>the document as necessary. >> >> -- sandro > >------------ >Graham Klyne >For email: >http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact -- Professor James Hendler http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 240-277-3388 (Cell)
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 11:58:26 UTC