[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Re: [regrep-cc-review] What if? CCRIM => CCOWL

To: adampease@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Adrian Walker <adrianw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 21:29:03 -0500
Message-id: <>
Adam --    (01)

You wrote.... FWIW, my take is that topic maps are yet another syntax 
specification, lacking any logical semantics. So OWL, KIF or any other 
logical language is appropriate for capturing semantics (meaning), while 
topic maps are not. One can convert syntax and labels from one to the 
other, but semantics will be lost.    (02)

You may be interested in the "Semantic Web Presentation" at 
www.reengineeringllc.com .  It argues that there is yet another dimension 
to "semantics" -- namely that it's going to be necessary to use plain 
English computationally on top of whatever logical language is chosen.    (03)

The examples in the presentation can be run (and changed) by pointing a 
browser to the same site.    (04)

Hope this is of interest.     Cheers,  -- Adrian    (05)

                                            INTERNET BUSINESS LOGIC    (06)

                                              www.reengineeringllc.com    (07)

Dr. Adrian Walker
Reengineering LLC
PO Box 1412
CT 06011-1412 USA    (08)

Phone: USA 860 583 9677
Cell:    USA  860 830 2085
Fax:    USA  860 314 1029    (09)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (010)

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