[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: NPR, Godel, Semantic Web
Logical systems as closed systems don't usually trip too badly. As I've said before, don't fly the first one. As medium closed, semi-permeable, I'd say Danny is probably right; there are some feedback chaos-like issues, but even then, I don't see insurmountable obstacles except horrible expenses where the knowledge base is large and there are lots and lots of rules. Remember that expert systems were the result of scaling down big ambitious knowledge projects to some reasonable domains. I can definitely see a place for that on the web and I think we already are for example, in the financial systems for mortgage applications, etc. For a system to be semantically interoperable, someone has to have a very good domain concept (common information model or CIM) and a lot of bucks for the customized version that runs according to the local ricebowl legacies. We will get some of this by default from schema efforts, and lots of locally interoperable apps, but there is a time and the river problem where by the time you get the boat built, the river has moved on, so aim for the other shore, not an eddy in the current. It may be something that emerges bottom up. Still, pattern-seeking analyses have to cope with superstition and gaming so when hooking up semantic engines, eg, pattern seeking bots, make sure they go to only the *best* places for information then expect to be surprised by the infoGhettos (used to be called the bazaar). In the Sci Am article, as I recall, the two main points were a common language (universal system... bleaaachh) and some simple and widely available tools for adding the information to the web site. Now the problem becomes inter-site and inter-domain reasoning (logical layers, assertions of authority such as all the state rules for crime classification vs the federal rules and so forth). The overlaps, the ecotones, are fascinating and dangerous places but we already build systems like this. Expensive beasties. The presence of a data standard (say NIBRS) makes it economic to do; the requirement for customization makes it a business. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] At 11:14 AM 5/7/01 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: >The semantic web doesn't trip on godel or >incompleteness. It trips on authority. It may well trip on authority, but this claim suggests that it also trips on inherent limitations of logical processing. >The crockness of it isn't the doability; >it is the need to do it now. Good >topic for research, good topic for >discussion; perhaps not the initiative >by which all other tasks before the >W3C et al should be measured or circumscribed. I've got to agree with that, though the Semantic Web does strike me as a better yardstick (less likely to lead to horrible designs) than some of the other possibilities.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|