ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Truth

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 07:37:36 -0400
Message-id: <4FFC1400.9000204@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 7/9/12 11:05 PM, John F Sowa wrote:
> Leo and Kingsley,
>
> I'm responding to both of your notes because they address two aspects
> of a disease that I believe has been destroying the Semantic Web.
>
> In short, the Semantic Web is first and foremost an engineering problem,
> but it has been infected by certain scientists who forced the engineers
> to adopt inappropriate solutions to their problems -- or even worse,
> to ignore certain important kinds of problems.
>
> Leo
>> Motik, Boris. 2005. On the Properties of Metamodeling in OWL.
>> In: 4th Int. Semantic Web Conf. (ISWC 2005).
>> 
>http://dip.semanticweb.org/documents/Boris-Motik-On-the-Properties-of-Metamodeling-in-OWL.pdf
> I attended a talk by Boris Motik, and I spoke with him.  He is very good
> at what he does.  This paper demonstrates his technical ability.  But
> like nearly all of the DL theoreticians, he knows nothing about how to
> develop applications or what practitioners would ever find useful.
>
> He is very good at proving theorems about decidability, but nobody has
> shown that restricting a language to make it decidable is useful for
> any purpose whatsoever.  Restricting a language cannot solve anything
> faster.  It only makes certain kinds of problems impossible to state.
>
> Cyc has had far more experience in working on actual problems than
> any of the DL theoreticians ever dreamed of.  And they have *never*
> found decidability to be a problem.  Bob MacGregor developed the widely
> used LOOM and PowerLoom systems, which combined a DL with a rule-based
> system and with bindings to programming languages and databases.
>
> MacGregor worked with users who actually used his systems to develop
> major applications.  And he said that *none* of the users ever asked
> for decidability, but they all asked for more expressive power.
> The net result is that the "Decidability Thought Police" purged
> MacGregor from their community.
>
> Decidability is the single worst disease that has destroyed the
> usefulness of the SW.  When I look at Motik's paper, I see disease.
> There is nothing in that paper that is of the slightest value for
> any practical application of any kind.  It makes me angry that
> those people have been destroying what might have been a very
> useful development, if they had left the SW to the engineers.
>
> JFS
>>> Note that Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft abandoned URIs.
> KI
>> If that's true, they are making a *serious mistake*. Basically,
>> they are veering away from the point you made earlier:
>> "The big advance was the instant, universal, world-wide
>> availability of data everywhere."
> Let me clarify.  It is extremely valuable to have URIs for
> "named entities" such as people, places, things, and documents.
> The technology for detecting named entities in documents and
> annotating them with the appropriate URIs has become quite
> successful, and I strongly recommend continuing it.
>
> But the idea of assigning a unique URI to every word sense of
> every word is impossible.  Not even a professional lexicographer
> can do that reliably, and the exercise would be worse than useless.    (01)

Yes, I agree with that point. I see URIs as power data object 
identifiers. Then from the Linked Data perspective, you get the 
additional benefit of said URIs resolving to resources bearing 
structured data.
>
> Furthermore, science has found it extremely valuable to continue
> using the same words -- even though their meanings change from
> one theory to another.  All the major words in physics change
> their definitions as you go from Newtonian mathematics to
> relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, etc:  mass, energy,
> momentum, force, position, velocity, acceleration, light,
> charge, heat, etc.
>
> But physicists continue to use the same words throughout every
> change of theory.  It would be worse than useless to change
> their words (or annotate them) each time they change anything
> in their theories.
>
> I have more examples about the diseases that scientists have
> inflicted on the SW.  But this is enough for now.    (02)

Yes, I agree :-)    (03)


Kingsley
>
> John
>   
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>   
>
>    (04)


--     (05)

Regards,    (06)

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen    (07)

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)

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