# Ann: Paper about Web Prolog (Discussion)

**URL:** <https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/ann-paper-about-web-prolog-discussion/3150>\
**Category:** Discussion\
**Created:** [August 27, 2019, 5:11pm UTC](https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/ann-paper-about-web-prolog-discussion/3150 "2019-08-27T17:11:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 59

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![grossdan](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/swi-prolog.discourse.group/grossdan/32/23_2.png) [@grossdan](https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/u/grossdan)\
**Post date:** [September 2, 2019, 3:00pm UTC](https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/ann-paper-about-web-prolog-discussion/3150/59 "2019-09-02T15:00:55Z")

</div>

> [@torbjorn.lager](#):
>
> or Semantic Web people

I may be completely wrong here, but I have a feeling that semantic web people, who are deeply invested in description logic approaches – its a huge area of research and industry standard and practice, will have a harder time with a Prolog implementation that doesn’t have a strong formal semantics (and, its an undecidedable language).

There is the stream of datalog research with formal semantics – but, prolog is not datalog.

Dan

---

_[View the full topic](https://swi-prolog.discourse.group/t/ann-paper-about-web-prolog-discussion/3150)._