When you're talking Natural Language we are a very literal people. (01)
SGIS
Antoinette Arsic
Sr. Systems Engineer
8618 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 100
Vienna, VA 22182
703-506-8621
443-567-2703
aarsic@xxxxxxxx
www.SGIS.com
________________________________________
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Adrian Walker
[adriandwalker@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 4:51 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation Ontology [was Semantic Web
shortcomings] (02)
Hi John -- (03)
I wrote... (04)
This 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)
Just to clarify. By "code" I meant the source code of a programming language
such as C or Java. (06)
You wrote in reply... (07)
I would say that every natural language *is* a code, and you can't escape
coding. (08)
You seem to fix on the same meaning for "code" by referring to "coding" in your
reply. (09)
So. English is Java code? Reductio ad Absurdum! (010)
Cheers, -- Adrian (011)
Internet Business Logic
A Wiki and SOA Endpoint for Executable Open Vocabulary English over SQL and RDF
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com<http://www.reengineeringllc.com> Shared
use is free (012)
Adrian Walker
Reengineering (013)
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:55 AM, John F. Sowa
<sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Adrian, (014)
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: (015)
People read notations that look like their native language much
more quickly and easily than notations with funny symbols. (016)
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". (017)
> 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. (018)
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. (019)
John (020)
_________________________________________________________________
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<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<mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (021)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (022)
|