[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation Ontology [was Semantic Web shortcomings]

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:55:33 -0400
Message-id: <48B17665.3080302@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Adrian,    (01)

I've said again and again that I consider your version of executable
English an example of a controlled natural language.  If you want to
distinguish it by using a different name, I have no objection.  But
the primary point I've been trying to make is very simple:    (02)

    People read notations that look like their native language much
    more quickly and easily than notations with funny symbols.    (03)

There is a lot of work to be done on human factors, design issues,
help facilities, tools, etc.  I'm happy that you're exploring
different variations, which may prove to be very useful in one way
or another.  But the most important issue is the importance of
notations that are based on NLs.  Once that is accepted, there
are many, many issues about refining the phrase "based on".    (04)

 > This is what the system online at the site below does.  It's a bit
 > like throwing away the code and computing using the comments
 > instead.  Except that, as far as an author is concerned, there
 > is no need to write any code.    (05)

That's fine.  My only objection is to the claim "there is no need
to write any code."  I would say that every natural language *is*
a code, and you can't escape coding.    (06)

John    (07)

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    (08)

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