John wrote:
>> stated the obvious: "Users always ask for more expressive
>> power, and they never ask for decidability."
>>
>
> (01)
Pat replied:
> I wish this were true. Unfortunately, there are many users who either ask
>for, or worse simply *presume* decideability. (02)
Certainly our experience in the manufacturing industry and in the
cybersecurity business has been that decidability has been a sine qua
non for commercial use of the technology. I think Mike Bennett will
confirm that the same is true of the finance industry. I think John's
experience with "users" is a more sophisticated group who realize that
they are working at the state of the art. Commercial interests are not
willing to take the risks that go with that. (03)
> So that if you give them a system which sometimes says "no answer", they will
>simply take this as the answer, "no". Which is one of Ian's arguments:
>whatever you give users, they will treat it as an oracle. So it had better
>*be* an oracle, to avoid trouble.
> (04)
And as regards most industrial users, this is bang on. A missing
database record can be treated as "no existing contract" through several
levels of management before someone actually calls the account manager. (05)
-Ed (06)
--
Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Systems Integration Division, Engineering Laboratory
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 Cel: +1 240-672-5800 (07)
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." (08)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (09)
|