ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Making the case for formal ontology and deep seman

To: ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 10:27:07 -0400
Message-id: <4D99D53B.8060606@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Peter, John B., Duane, Matthew, and Mike,    (01)

PY
> Use cases of serious ontology work that supports deep semantics,
> reasoning, inferencing, etc. are being overshadowed by "low hanging
> fruits, terminology work, LOD, and other shallow semantics    (02)

JB
> +10 Peter!    (03)

DN
> WOOT!!!!    (04)

MW
> Whilst I agree that the use of deep semantics has been neglected in this
> summit, I do not think that your characterisation of terminology work, LOD,
> and other shallow semantics as "low hanging fruits" is accurate. I think a
> more accurate characterisation would be that these are most of all the fruit
> there are, but that there are also some exotic fruit that use deep
> semantics.    (05)

MB
> I do not know of any applications of first order logic other than
> OWL, though one or two case studies had their own proprietary
> formats.    (06)

I strongly agree with Peter, John, and Duane.    (07)

Matthew and Mike are right about what is being done with the methods
available for the Semantic Web, but that is my major criticism of
the Semantic Web:  it uses only a tiny fraction of the technology
that was developed for AI, NLP, *and* commercial IT.    (08)

Matthew called the AI technology other than OWL "exotic", but
that is only true if you define the Semantic Web as "mainstream".
However, we would not need this Ontology Summit if the SW were
truly mainstream.    (09)

I do agree with Matthew that shallow semantics and LOD are
"low hanging fruit" for some kinds of applications.  But those
are new applications that are very different from traditional IT.    (010)

Re use of FOL:  The WHERE-clause of SQL queries and constraints has
the expressive power of full FOL -- that is why you can't use OWL
to state SQL constraints.    (011)

SQL is not exotic, it is very low-hanging fruit, it is intimately
integrated with mainstream IT, and it runs many more commercial
web sites than OWL.  If anybody asked me which would survive
longer -- SQL or OWL -- I would not bet on OWL.    (012)

John    (013)

_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/   
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (014)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>