Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Is google a conceptual graph engine?
 Hi Thomas, Thanks for the quote. I think that in front of this issues attitudes are possible a) Say that it is incompatible. b) Offer several ways to resolve it Actually, it seems that the semantic web is based on a single type of logic. However, several ontology resolution mechanisms are possible a) Possibility Theory expanding on fuzzy set theory b) Probability theory b) Simple Boolean logic (the one actually used by W3C) c) Multiple valued logic As you can notice, the world is complex, our knowledge incomplete and evolving, this is why we may need more than one logic to based the semantic web. Boolean logic leads to a whole or nothing view of the world. I just went through the W3C wine OWL sample and I got a good laugh. Imagine, wine, a topic with so diverse point of views, so many different possible ontologies. It's funny to see that one example used by W3C is precisely one that would benefit from more than simple basic whole or nothing logic. What if we could choose our logic and ontology resolution mechanism? I can still remember when protégé made possible to use several problem solvers for a particular ontology; previously a tightly coupled system prevented that. Taking W3C example, we may have two wine experts and two corresponding ontology. We can reject both since they are incompatible and say that according to a Boolean logic this leads to an exclusion principle, a standard way could be made available to resolve the issue differently. According to John Sowa there are two kinds of ontology: a) Formal b) Prototype based. It seems that W3C is taking the path of formal ontology based on Tarsky work about model theory. What about a prototype based ontology which will probably be the real life ontology of the web? I personally think that formal ontologies are too costly to be used at the web scale and it will probably be very limited to small groups with special needs. Prototype based ontologies are more adapted to emergent and evolving knowledge. We just have to look at the recent progress made on Adaptive Object Model to see that models, ontologies are evolving at the rhythm of our knowledge evolution. Are there any discussion, links, and pointers leading to that direction at W3C? Cheers Didier PH Martin 
|
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
|
|||||||||
