Re: rule proto-proposal

From: pat hayes (phayes@ai.uwf.edu)
Date: 05/29/01


>Hi Pat,
>
>At 05:58 PM 5/29/2001 -0500, pat hayes wrote:
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>some additions to Pats suggestion:
>>>
>>>1) In many applications it is important to distinguish between 
>>>different kind of RDF data, eg.
>>>   between different sources of RDF data, one is trustworthy, the other one
>>> not.
>>
>>That seems to me to be an assertion about the source rather than 
>>the data (?) But in any case it goes well beyond the RDF or DAML 
>>semantics.
>
>If we built a rule language for processing of RDF data it is 
>necessary to distinguish
>different sets of RDF data.

Well OK, but I don't see why this topic comes up particularly when we 
talk of rules. If you want to distinguish sets of RDF data, why not 
do it in RDF? After all, RDF has the ability to describe its own 
expressions, so this ought to fit into it naturally. Why not treat an 
set of RDF data as something that is referrable to by a URI, ie a 
resource?

>One example where it is important to distinguish between
>different kind sets of RDF data is when it comes from different 
>sources, and that
>it originates from different sources is a property of the data.
>There are other applications areas, e.g. the computation of 
>different semantics (see my RDF Schema
>example).

We really must speak different languages.
(1) To speak of "computing" semantics doesnt make sense to me; and 
(2) why would we want to be using different semantics in any case? 
Isnt the whole idea to have a single semantics?

>>>This needs to be reflected in the rule language - it is not 
>>>sufficient to just query if a certain
>>> fact is present. To distinguish between different sources would 
>>>be enabled by model identifiers
>>>
>>>subject[predicate->object]@model
>>
>>I have no idea what you are talking about. What is a 'model' in this sense?
>
>A set of RDF statements (triples).

Ah, I see. What is the difference between saying, in M, that 
subject[predicate->object] is true, and saying that 
subject[predicate->object]@M ? Can I say subject[predicate->object]@M 
in N where N is different from M?

Pat

---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST