From: Jim Hendler ([email protected])
Date: 09/11/00
Folks- More info re: www-rdf-logic mailing list. >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:45:52 -0400 (EDT) >From: Dan Brickley <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >cc: Jim Hendler <[email protected]> >Subject: ANNOUNCE: new mailing list, [email protected] > > > >RDF IG, > >Brief note to announce www-rdf-logic, >a new RDF Interest Group discussion list for 'logic on the Web'. > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/ > >Copied below is the overview text I've just sent to a new list, >mailto:[email protected] that we've created for technical discussion >concerning the design of logic-based languages for use on the Web. > > >A few words on the inevitable 'where do I post' dillema: > >We're all familar with the difficulties of scoping mailing list >discussions, and with the high traffic levels on the RDF IG list. A number >of projects have a need to discuss, in some detail, designs for logic-based >Web languages -- the DAML initiative, as very helpfully outlined by Jim >Hendler[1], being a notable example. While I think it is clear that the >main RDF IG list is reaching its useful capacity in terms of traffic, and >that RDF/logic discussion needs a home, there is no clear cut dividing >line for partitioning our discussion. That's life: we will have to develop >our intuitions as to what-belongs-where. The new list is for 'logic >stuff, although logic crops up for example when we discuss our >(occasionally varying) interpretations of the RDF specs. We'll make it up >as we go along, following the broad outline from the list scope ([2], >copied below). I'd discourage cross-posting. Occasional summaries from one >list to the other would be handy, but both have online searchable archives >so crossposting is likely to be overkill. > >Broad brush, the idea is that there are an increasing number of people >working on RDF from a formal logic perspective, and that traffic on >details of this are likely to be outside the interests of many on the >main RDF IG list. Similarly, the logic discussion may proceed more smoothly if >conducted on a list that is not addressing the details of W3C's RDF specs, >syntax in particular. > >A tentative way of proceeding is for 'highly technical' logic threads to >be initiated on the new list, and for threads from the main list to be >occasionally transferred to www-rdf-logic when they get too >detailed. There's a balance to be struck, but I believe >the only way to find it is to wade straight in. So rather than spend ages >debating mail list charters/scope, let's have the logic enthusiasts sign >up to www-rdf-logic and see what happens! (this should be fun...) > >Dan > >ps. for those who'd stumbled across it, the www-rdf-logic list obsoletes >the [email protected] address, which we never formally announced. IMHO >there's more to the semantic web than logic, but that's another thread... ;-) > >[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2000Sep/0112.html > >[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/ > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:57:59 -0400 (EDT) >From: Dan Brickley <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Subject: Introducing www-rdf-logic >Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 13:58:02 -0400 (EDT) >Resent-From: [email protected] > > > >Address for posting: [email protected] > >Administrivia: >(un)subscribe: [email protected] > with Subject: subscribe > or Subject: unsubscribe > > >Scope: >While W3C's existing work in this area has focussed on the XML, RDF and >URI specifications, the www-rdf-logic forum is intended to facilitate >discussion drawing upon a wide variety of research in the >Web/logic/ontologies area. > >General discussion concerning the RDF model, syntax and schema >specifications, implementations, W3C process etc. should be >directed to the main RDF Interest Group mailing list (www-rdf-interest). > >W3C provide the www-rdf-logic forum as a home for detailed technical >discussion of all approaches to the use of classical logic on >the Web for the representation of data such as inference rules, >ontologies, and complex schemata. The logic list, through association >with the RDF Interest Group, also serves as a mechanism to provide input >into W3C's Semantic Web activities, in particular relating >to future directions for the Resource Description Framework. > > >Context: Why www-rdf-logic ? > >This list has been called www-rdf-logic to reflect a concern that >discussion of logic languages for the Web take place within the >context of the broad Web architecture principles that informed the RDF >design. This should not overly constrain discussions on the >logic list: RDF was designed as a framework that could become >incrementally more expressive. The initial RDF design focusses on >simple binary relations between Web-identifiable resources. The notion of >a resource is fundamental both to RDF and to the general >Web architecture. In RDF, we model all our vocabulary constructs >(relations, types etc) as first class (ie. URI named) Web >resources. These basic principles (rather than the details of, for >example, RDF's XML syntax) can be used to connect the basic RDF >to more expressive logic/inference languages on the Web. > >Nearby: > RDF home page, http://www.w3.org/RDF/ > RDF Interest Group: http://www.w3.org/RDF/Interest/ > Semantic Web Development: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/sw/ > > > >Dan > >-- >mailto:[email protected] >RDF IG chair Prof. James Hendler Program Manager DARPA/ISO 703-696-2238 (phone) 3701 N. Fairfax Dr. 703-696-2201 (Fax) Arlington, VA 22203 [email protected]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 03/26/03 EST