Thanks, Adam, for the post. I think this is real progress. (01)
Ref Leo's earlier post
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum//ontolog-forum/2003-08/msg00030.html#nid02 (02)
Even OWL has multiple levels -- and not all of them are equally as
expressive either. (03)
Adam / Kurt, (04)
> less expressive representations include Protege and SQL (05)
Ref
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Conference_Call_2003-08-28#nid032 (06)
Adam, I trust you meant XML (not SQL) (07)
I thought that's what I heard. Kurt please verify so that Adam might
straighten out the posted record. (08)
Thanks & regards,
PPY
-- (09)
Adam Pease wrote Fri, 29 Aug 2003 08:23:58 -0700: (010)
> Folks,
> One point that Peter asked me to summarize from our call yesterday -
> we talked about having multiple output from this effort. The
> authoritative version of the proposed standard would be KIF, but we
> would translate out from KIF to other, less expressive representations
> include Protege and SQL. The KIF version would be normative. The other
> versions would also be normative, but incomplete, and implementors
> relying on the SQL version for example, would still be required to
> ensure that their stored procedures didn't violate the constraints
> stated in the KIF axioms.
>
> Adam
> (011)
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-admin/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (012)
|