Dear all, (01)
Thanks Valentin: true. The evolution of RIF, how it will develop, is
still subject to lots of discussion, see also (02)
Until RIF evolves and make these things clear, we think that the current
layercake is fine by leaving doors open (without trying to read too much
into a figure like that, one _cannot_ express all possible ideas and
issues into a single figure.) At some point in time we may have to look
at this issue again when we have a clearer image on RIF. (04)
Valentin Zacharias wrote:
> John F. Sowa:
>> Unifying Logic is the framework that includes the others
>> as subsets: RDF, RDF-S, Rule RIF, OWL, and SPARQL.
>> Each of these subsets is tailored for a specific kind of
>> inference engine and/or a specific range of uses. What
>> unifies them is the common model-theoretic semantics.
>> That semantics enables all of them to interoperate on
>> shared data and produce consistent results.
> RIF is a format for sharing rules created in different languages (or
> dialects) and - at least according to the documents they have published 
> - not all of these dialects are required to have a model theoretic semantic.
> In their own words : "A dialect is a rule language with a well-defined
> syntax and semantics. This semantics must be model-theoretic,
> proof-theoretic, or operational in this order of preference. "
> Which also is probably the reason for the "misplacement" of the unified
> logic box - there is no (known) unifying logic for the union of these
> (maybe change the layer stack and replace "RIF" by "RIF core"?)
> : http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-core/
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf (08)
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01)