John:
By "complete", I meant more in the sense that computationally it is
impossible to determine whether every possible "situation" *can* be
expressed by the language. (01)
I'm sure that you're right and that every Topic Map statement can be
expressed in CL. My concern is rather that not everything in Topic Maps
can be reified: for example, scope. One can make a statement with a
determined scope .... but one cannot identify all the statements for
which a given scope is valid, short of running a query over a very large
- potentially undeterminably sized - dataset. (02)
As an aside, if CL can perform all the functions you indicate, do we
need OMG's Ontology Definition Metamodel? Is CL king of the hill? (03)
Best regards,
Peter (04)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F.
Sowa
Sent: 08 September 2007 22:21
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] quadruples talk (05)
Peter, (06)
I was just giving a few obvious examples, and the most
obvious ones are from prepositions and verbs. I normally
use a more flexible mapping of natural languages to logic. (07)
> Mapping parts of speech to arities is only part of the issue... (08)
The issues with NLs are immensely complicated. I just wanted
to cite a few examples to show that NLs very commonly represent
complex relationships with many more than two participants.
When you add further complications, that just emphasizes
the points I was trying to make. (09)
> RDF uses pure triples, and require many joins;
> Topic Maps goes one better and uses triples with, additionally,
> scope (0 to n times) assigned to the association arc and role(s)
> assigned to the topic nodes connected by the arc; but still is
> inadequate to express context - and although the arc type
> (association type) can be reified, the scope cannot.
>
> Can CL really do this? It may be consistent in handling
> expressions (and not assuming or prejudicing any specific number
> of arities) but it can never claim to be complete. (010)
I have no idea what you mean by "complete". If you mean
complete with respect to NLs, that is still a research issue,
since nobody has a clue about the limitations of NLs. (011)
But if you mean, can CL represent anything in Topic Maps,
the answer is yes. If you have any example you don't know
how to map to CL, we'd be happy to show you how. Just two
conditions: (012)
1. Give the TM example. (013)
2. Explain in English every aspect of the significant information
that is represented by each feature of the TM. (014)
From that we can give you a CL representation. (015)
John (016)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (017)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (018)
|