From: Mike Dean ([email protected])
Date: 05/06/03
I think we're now ready to develop a plan to get to an initial release of "DAML Rules" over the next 6 months or so (by the next DAML PI Meeting). Here's a strawman. There seems to be an emerging consensus that we should focus initially on a Horn clause subset. We should start small and add features as required. The resulting design should be driven by our Use Cases and Requirements document. We can incrementally evolve the Use Cases and Requirements if necessary. We need to decide quickly whether to focus primarily on an RDF-based graph encoding of rules or an alternative (XML-based) representation. The result should work with OWL (vs. DAML+OIL, RDF, or RDFS). The result could involve multiple language levels. The result should preferably be (a subset of) RuleML. We should look carefully at potential commonalities between the rules language and DQL. The result should be implemented and be in a form suitable for submission to W3C. We should identify "postponed features" as suggestions for subsequent evolutions of the rules language (by us or other groups). Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 05/06/03 EST