[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Current Semantic Web Layer Cake

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 08:33:19 -0500
Message-id: <173E8E7C-8082-4B80-AF1A-670EF2A7D78B@xxxxxxxx>
On Aug 6, 2007, at 4:03 AM, Barker, Sean (UK) wrote:
> ...We suffer from identical syntax and allegedly identical  
> semantics all
> the time in data exchange (ISO 10303), so I don't see why logic should
> be any difference.    (01)

Is this really the same issue?  The original post had to do with the  
fact that one can choose different semantic foundations for one's  
underlying *logic* -- e.g., classical vs some form of negation-as- 
failure.  Using different logics in different domains on the same  
data can of course lead to different inferences, but *that* different  
logics are being adopted in those domains is something that can be  
known and (if necessary) planned for up front.    (02)

The data exchange problem that you appear to be referring to (forgive  
me if I'm mistaken) is that the intended meanings of terms used in  
the data to be exchanged are often not fully specified.  The latter  
seems to me to be exactly the problem that ontologies are supposed to  
solve, and may require a lot of work on both ends of an exchange  
before the "semantics" of the data is nailed down.    (03)

Chris Menzel    (04)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (05)

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