RE: XML Syntax Strawman (ACTION-309)

. . .

> I was under the impression that the Horn RIF dialect would include the
> ability to express some literal data values (which requires xs) and
some
> xpath/xquuery functions and operators (which requires fn).  Am I
wrong?

Right, but *pure* Horn operates over a domain of individuals only, so
only needs the rif namespace.

. . .

> > ... RIF should have its own root, rif:RIF,
> > e.g. as in:
> > 
> > <rif:RIF>
> >   <top><Ruleset>...</Ruleset></top>
> >   . . .
> >   <top><Ruleset>...</Ruleset></top>
> >   . . .
> >   <top>further top-level RIF object</top>
> >   . . .
> >   <top>further top-level RIF object</top>
> > </rif:RIF>
>
> Why?   What does that do for us that rdf:RDF does not do?

rif:RIF <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Core/Specification>
has its own namespace to support various kinds of rules including
Production Rules, which need their native XML serialization for
optimal XML-industry-strength rule interoperability.

. . .

-- Harold

Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 14:24:22 UTC