|
Duane,
What's the referent of 'we'? Adobe or Ontolog?
IMO, sharing implementation experiences is not a problem, so long as marketing language is not tolerated, but rather an honest attempt made to report experience. On Sep 4, 2007, at 11:59 , Duane Nickull wrote: With one minor exception: We regularly run sessions on Ontology/Semantic applications where we do encourage vendors to share their implementation experiences. These sessions have been very valuable in the past. I would like to keep this on file as we are due for another one in the next 60 days or so if the community wishes.
Duane
+1 on "no advertising"
Rick
Bully for Chris!
Peter, I would respectfully ask that you take what steps you can to suppress "advertising" of this sort on ontolog.
.bill
On Sep 4, 2007, at 00:34 , Chris Menzel wrote:
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:03:57AM -0700, Dennis L. Thomas wrote: ... That 2nd generation software system had a database backend, which topped out at the complexity barrier. Now, our 3rd generation semantic knowledgebase system, called Mark 3, is designed to be a self-building, self-organizing and self-transcending
and perhaps "self-promoting"...? :-)
system that scales to unlimited dimensions to simulate every form of human knowledge and to reason with that knowledge like people.
The undecidability of first-order consequence notwithstanding.
... This is an enterprise tool, though we plan to offer a FREE limited trial copy the size of a large database for people to play with....
No comment.
-chris
Chief Scientist 3600 O'Donnell Street, Suite 600 Baltimore, MD 21224 Office: 410-675-1201 Cell: 443-858-6444
_________________________________________________________________
-- ********************************************************************** "Speaking only for myself" **********************************************************************
_________________________________________________________________
|