|
Better
said in conclusion, is that I want to impute the predicate in a
triple, as "is part of" imputes type Part for the subject and type
Whole for the object; I want to make explicit Part & Whole typed
resources with a semi-anonymous predicate, while "is part of" does the
opposite, namely one explicit predicate with anonymous subject &
object. Finally, I think of Grover as a closed vocabulary of short hints,
not technical definitions users with common sense may fail to
understand, people who I want to enter triples with a generalized
desktop-tool rather than hide them behind APIs and UIs, a sure recipe for
constantly evolving maintenance issues..It is the wiki
mind-set!
If
anyone has interest in this project, please let me know privately. Thanks -
john
All,
I really appreciate the amount of your time and the depth of your responses
to my questions - you've sharpened my understanding of a few things (and
thanks for the name inspiration). I hope you benefitted also.
- Grover is a vocabulary of properties - of prepositions plus tenses of
'to-have'
- explicitly built atop RDF's model ..... "a Resource instance HAS
instances of Properties"
- with "loosely-coupling predicates" to reduce the size of ontologies,
their costs and scariness
- A vocabulary intentionally trivial for anyone to self-master
- A vocabulary intentionally suitable for modelling document content
- Grover is a vocabulary of categories - of adjectives & adverbs
- that uses a highly useful naming scheme... type:topic-name ... (see ISO
Topic Maps)
- that implements the syntax seen here eg past(Statement) must(Statement)
etc
John Sowa's right that "RDF and most versions of logic are not polymorphic"
meaning that prepositions' semantic rules would, under Grover, depend on the
types of subject & predicate nodes present in a triple. But I don't use a
property's name/range/domain as validation criteria, I see them as indexes to
the formalisms, in other words, I presume the validity of relationships,
looking up applicable formalisms as needed -- I think that's what's meant in
part by an open-world model.
So, as 'polymorphic properties' seem Sowa's only technical concern, and as
I expect little effort dealing with those, I see no impediment to bringing a
Grover front-end to my semantic wikis. To the extent he & others believe
that Grover is not a recommended practice, that ontologies need to be heavier
than what I envision, suggests there's much for us all to learn in the future.
For the present, I'll stop this thread.
Thanks again - jmc
_________________________________________________________________
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)
|