- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 01:13:56 -0400
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
> But you can't have it both ways. You often argue that the stuff in > SWSL-Rules (e.g., the hilog/f-logic stuff) is well understood, "widely" > used, Well, it is widely used as far as research goes (incl research labs) and some in the industry. (For instance, HiLog is now part of Common Logic.) Nobody claimed anything more than that. > and heavily accepted...er...but the key vendors who are a major > focus of a standards effort haven't heard of it. How many vendors have heard of Description Logic in y2000? y2001? > Also, it's not like the key differentiating features show up in some > form in the business rules community (in all it's OPS5 derived glory), > afaict. > > > How many business people understood and were interested in OWL and its > > predecessors in, say, year 2000? > > This is a point against your position :) To the contrary. (I think we are building our arguments on incompatible proof systems. :) --michael
Received on Thursday, 23 June 2005 05:14:03 UTC