[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web pe

• To: "'Thomas B. Passin'" <tpassin@c...>, XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 08:35:40 -0500

Yes, but the 'syntax is not trivial' argument applies.  As we 
started this thread, it was pointed out the SemWeb RDF is an
ugly syntax, so perhaps it is a bad start to attempts to 
universalize metadata.  As Joshua points out, the seminal 
idea is SPO and that as John Sowa points out and Joshua in 
passing, is also the concept of Prolog.   Sowa also points 
out repeatedly that XML is awkward for this as well, so no 
one seems to be satisfied.

Analogical reasoning can be done quite logically.  Sowa's  
order of abduction, induction, deduction is at least to me, 
interesting with regard to how tools should assist in the 
creation of metadata.

len

From: Thomas B. Passin [mailto:tpassin@c...]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> I believe the answer is yes, or at least, analogical reasoning is
> doable.  I'll post that question to the CG list.
> 
> http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/analog.htm
> 
> Sowa has taken the position that we'd be better off with something
> closer to natural languages, BTW.

more or less orthogonal to the analogical vs logical
question, because Sowa keeps pointing out that a controlled natural 
language is just another syntax for logic, fully equivalent to any other 
such syntax.

• Prev by Date: RE: Bruce Perens and yet more patents
• Next by Date: RE: Bruce Perens and yet more patents
• Previous by thread: Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Next by thread: RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread