Advertisement

Abstract

The Rule Interchange Format (RIF) is an activity within the World Wide Web Consortium aimed at developing a Web standard for exchanging rules. The need for rule-based information processing on the Semantic Web has been felt ever since RDF was introduced in the late 90’s. As ontology development picked up pace this decade and as the limitations of OWL became apparent, rules were firmly put back on the agenda. RIF is therefore a major opportunity for the introduction of rule based technologies into the main stream of knowledge representation and information processing on the Web.

Despite its humble name, RIF is not just a format and is not primarily about syntax. It is an extensible framework for rule-based languages, called RIF dialects, which includes precise and formal specification of the syntax, semantics, and XML serialization. In this paper we will discuss the main principles behind RIF, introduce the RIF extensibility framework, and outline the Basic Logic Dialect—the only fully developed RIF dialect so far.

Keywords

Logic Programming Semantic Structure Semantic Framework Logic Programming Language Intended Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Boley, H., Kifer, M.: RIF basic logic dialect (October 2007), http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-bld/
  2. 2.
    Boley, H., Kifer, M.: RIF Basic logic dialect. W3C Working Draft (July 2008), http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-fld/
  3. 3.
    Boley, H., Kifer, M.: RIF Framework for logic dialects. W3C Working Draft (July 2008), http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-fld/
  4. 4.
    Bry, F., Eckert, M., Patranjan, P.-L.: Reactivity on the web: Paradigms and applications of the language xchange. Journal of Web Engineering 5(1), 3–24 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, W., Kifer, M., Warren, D.S.: HiLog: A foundation for higher-order logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming 15(3), 187–230 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clark, K.L.: Negation as failure. In: Gallaire, H., Minker, J. (eds.) Logic and Data Bases, pp. 292–322. Plenum Press (1978)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clocksin, W.F., Mellish, C.S.: Programming in Prolog. Springer, Heidelberg (1981)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Sainte Marie, C., Paschke, A.: RIF Production rule dialect. W3C Working Draft (July 2008), http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-prd/
  9. 9.
    Dean, M., Connolly, D., van Harmelen, F., Hendler, J., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D.L., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Stein, L.A.: Owl web ontology language 1.0 reference. Technical report, WWW Consortium (November 2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Enderton, H.B.: A Mathematical Introduction to Logic. Academic Press, London (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fallside, D.C., Walmsley, P.: XML Schema Part 0: Primer 2 edn. Technical report, WWW Consortium (October 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/
  12. 12.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Logic Programming: Proceedings of the Fifth Conference and Symposium, pp. 1070–1080 (1988)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9(3/4), 365–386 (1991)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Jess, the rule language for the java platform, http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess/
  16. 16.
    Kifer, M.: FLORA-2: An object-oriented knowledge base language. The FLORA-2, http://flora.sourceforge.net
  17. 17.
    Kifer, M., Lausen, G., Wu, J.: Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages. Journal of ACM 42, 741–843 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kozlenkov, A.: PROVA: A Language for Rule-based Java Scripting, Data and Computation Integration, and Agent Programming (May 2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Polleres, A., Boley, H., Kifer, M.: RIF Datatypes and built-ins. W3C Working Draft (July 2008), http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-dtb/
  21. 21.
    Shoham, Y.: Nonmonotonic logics: meaning and utility. In: Proc. 10th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 388–393. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1987)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Van Gelder, A., Ross, K.A., Schlipf, J.S.: The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. Journal of ACM 38(3), 620–650 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Kifer
    • 1
  1. 1.State University of New York at Stony BrookUSA

Personalised recommendations