RE: SWR/ RuleML rule names

From: Wagner, G.R. (G.R.Wagner@tm.tue.nl)
Date: 07/15/04

  • Next message: Benjamin Grosof: "RE: SWR/ RuleML rule names"
    I don't understand why a rule label should be different from a URIref.
    After all, a rule label is nothing else as the name of a rule, and in 
    the SW a rule should be considered a resource like a class or a
    property, so it should be identified with the help of a URIref,
    and it would be preferable to reuse "rdf:ID" as its identifier
    attribute name instead of the "ruleml:_rlab" element name.
    
    Please let's be economic with introducing new names. We don't
    need new identifier attribute names for each new SW language.
    We can simply reuse "rdf:ID" and "rdf:resource".
    
    Btw, I don't think it makes sense to consider a rule name an 
    (OWL) individual. The rule is the individual, and its name 
    is the name of this individual, but why should we consider it
    to be an indivual itself? 
    
    -Gerd
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: owner-joint-committee@wrath.daml.org
    > [mailto:owner-joint-committee@wrath.daml.org]On Behalf Of David Z.
    > Hirtle
    > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 8:44 PM
    > To: mdean@bbn.com
    > Cc: joint-committee@daml.org; harold.boley@nrc.gc.ca
    > Subject: SWRL RuleML Suggestion
    > 
    > 
    > Hello Mike and all,
    > 
    > As was discussed in the last JC telecon, the RuleML XSD
    > (http://www.daml.org/rules/proposal/ruleml.xsd) accompanying the
    > current version of the SWRL proposal is not fully compatible with
    > RuleML (http://www.ruleml.org/0.86).  Namely, rule labels in
    > the SWRL proposal require empty content with an href value:
    > 
    > 
    >  <xsd:element name="_rlab">
    >    <xsd:complexType>
    >      <xsd:attribute name="href" type="ruleml:RuleName" 
    > use="required" />
    >    </xsd:complexType>
    >  </xsd:element>
    > 
    >  <xsd:simpleType name="RuleName">
    >    <xsd:restriction base="xsd:anyURI" />
    >  </xsd:simpleType>
    > 
    > 
    > or more abstractly (from Section 5):
    > 
    > 
    >  <ruleml:_rlab
    >    ruleml:href = xsd:anyURI (required)
    >  >
    >    Content: ( )
    >  </ruleml:_rlab>
    > 
    > 
    > This use of the href attribute is different from RuleML's 
    > "webizing" use.
    > 
    > In RuleML the _rlab element does not allow an href attribute,
    > but rather contains an ind(ividual).  Allowing so-called "foreign"
    > individuals is still preferable to shifting them from element 
    > content to
    > attribute value.
    > 
    > For _rlab's, it would be desirable to use an OWL instance (Individual)
    > e.g. from http://www.daml.org/rules/proposal/swrlx.xsd,
    > 
    >  <xsd:element name="Ontology">
    >    ...
    >    <xsd:complexType>
    >      ...
    >      <!-- Instances -->
    >      <xsd:element ref="owlx:Individual" />
    >      ...
    >    </xsd:complexType>
    >    ...
    >  </xsd:element>
    > 
    > together with webizing via the "name" attribute of OWL's Individual
    > (from http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-xmlsyntax/#owls_Individual):
    > 
    >  <Individual
    >    name = xsd:anyURI
    >  >
    >    Content: (Annotation*, (type | DataPropertyValue | 
    > ObjectPropertyValue)* )
    >  </Individual>
    > 
    > Using these defintions, we can now use rule labels as the 
    > content of the 
    > _rlab
    > element instead of as an href attribute value.  The _rlab element 
    > declaration
    > would simply be as follows in the proposal's ruleml.xsd:
    > 
    >  <xsd:element name="_rlab">
    >    <xsd:complexType>
    >      <xsd:sequence>
    >        <xsd:element ref="owlx:Individual" />
    >      </xsd:sequence>
    >    </xsd:complexType>
    >  </xsd:element>
    > 
    > 
    > Thanks,
    > 
    > David and Harold
    > 
    > 
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 07/15/04 EST