From: Benjamin Grosof (bgrosof@mit.edu)
Date: 07/13/01
Hi folks,
With regard to what kind of inferencing is reasonable to consider to
support in DAML, in combination with DAML+OIL, as an inference (as
opposed to transformational) rule language/expressive-extension:
I believe that the starting point should be declarative logic programs (LP),
first without negation ("hornlog LP"),
then with negation-as-failure ("ordinary LP"),
then with prioritized conflict handling ("courteous LP") and
procedural attachments ("situated courteous LP").
The first step in Webizing this is to permit the logical constants
(relation symbols, function/constructor symbols) to be URI's.
The second step in Webizing this is to incorporate the DAML+OIL features.
On the way, RDF as a form of essentially syntax, well as XML as a more
usual kind of syntax, should be supported.
The latest serious attempt at defining a standard for all this is
RuleML (http://www.dfki.de/ruleml, also see
http://www.mit.edu/~bgrosof/#XMLRules), for which a new version (0.8)
of DTD's has just this week been released. There are several
research-world tools now available for it, including to execute a
version of it in the XSB logic programming system. IBM is planning to
support it in CommonRules (which already supports situated courteous
LP and translation to/fro XSB and KIF, with its own earlier XML format
BRML).
RuleML has not yet tackled incorporating DAML+OIL features, so that is
one of the next things to do. Please contact me if you'd like to work
together on that.
Benjamin
Prof. Benjamin Grosof, MIT Sloan Sch. of Mgmt. (http://mitsloan.mit.edu)
Contracts and Policies for E-Commerce, XML Agent Communication
bgrosof@mit.edu http://www.mit.edu/~bgrosof/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST