ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Representation - KIF vs Protege [was Re: [ontolog-forum] Personas

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Adam Pease <adampease@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:42:47 -0700
Message-id: <5.0.0.25.0.20030811123933.022ef988@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Monica,
   We can try to limit or explain jargon, but this issue is at the heart of 
the goals we're trying to achieve.  Our goal is to create a formal 
ontology, and the question of which language to use for that ontology, and 
the implications of that choice is central.  My contention is that without 
the features of logic, which approximate that expressivity of human natural 
languages, we will have great difficulty creating a high-quality ontology.    (01)

Adam    (02)



At 03:03 PM 8/10/2003 -0600, Monica Martin wrote:
>Adam Pease wrote:
>
>>Pat,
>>
>>At 01:30 AM 8/9/2003 -0400, Patrick Cassidy wrote:
>>
>>>I am exceedingly reluctant to get into a prolonged
>>>discussion of representation formats, but since assertions
>>>have been made that I think are not correct, I will
>>>state my views.
>>>
>>>As best I can tell, Protege has mechanisms that will
>>>permit us to include everything that can be stated in
>>>KIF.
>>
>>
>>
>>I'll try to answer in more detail later, but this is just plain 
>>false.  Protege is a frame language.  It can't represent ternary or 
>>high-arity relations, quantification etc.  The only way one could 
>>interpret this statement as being true would be a trivial one in which 
>>one can include the axioms in comments.  In that sense Forth, XML, SQL, 
>>CLASSIC etc are all, doxastic, modal, deontic, higher order logics, with 
>>probabilistic features, because you can put anything in a comment string.
>>
>>Adam
>mm1: Everyone, I can appreciate each of you is compassionate about your 
>position and the need to use either approach. However, for those of us 
>just learning and trying to grasp these concepts, I think this is a bit 
>overwhelming. Can we concentrate on the core set of goals we need to 
>achieve and the use of tools that can help us get there? Thank you.
>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: 
>>http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post: 
>>mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: 
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post: 
>mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (03)

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: 
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (04)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>