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
Bristol
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/
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 (010)
|