Rick, (01)
I completely support the idea of tagging documents, and there is
no question that the *ML family is the winner. But there are
many different ways to use tags and to process the information
that goes to and from them. (02)
RM> The evidence is that it's RDFa publishing that's of interest. (03)
Of course we have to support it. (04)
RM> Or in the case of governments how to coordinate a group of
> web masters to effectively publish RDFa tags in pages. The
> measure of effectiveness might be how the information published
> in this format could be extracted and synthesized from those
> pages at lower cost or increased transparency. (05)
The only way to get consistent tagging is to have the tags
generated automatically. The most crucial need for advanced
knowledge representation technology is in generating the
tags and in processing the data after it's been read from
the tags. (06)
The notation used for the tags has to be something that
is suitable for embedding in documents. But when you have
a large block of data, redundant tags are worse than useless. (07)
Translating from one syntax to another is trivial, and
its important to design notations that match the general
semantics to every version of special-purpose syntaxes. (08)
JFS>> It [all the features of Hets] is a huge superset,
>> most of which is irrelevant. (09)
RM> That's a pretty big body of work to be irrelevant. (010)
Right now, LOD has made *all* semantics irrelevant.
As I said, I used to call SQL the world's worst notation
for logic. But I've grown rather fond of it after seeing
what things have degenerated to. (011)
If we want to support any kind of decent tools, we have
to bring back at least a workable amount of logic. (012)
JFS>> (And by the way, implementations that claim to use HOL
>> really use HOL in the same way as Common Logic: they use
>> a first-order model theory that permits quantification
>> over functions and relations.) (013)
RM> And I also believe types. I think you'll agree the
> differences are bigger than quantification theory. (014)
What do you mean by types? The hierarchies of infinities? (015)
You can axiomatize them in Common Logic, but so far,
the government debt is still finite. If and when anybody
finds a need for them, we can support them. But right
now, it's a struggle to get any semantics at all. (016)
RM> The FCAStone software mentions an FCA data format. I was
> able to find reference to the conversion software, but can't
> find a reference to the format itself. Would you be able to
> provide a reference to the FCA data format? (017)
Following is the FCA Homepage: (018)
http://www.upriss.org.uk/fca/fca.html (019)
If you can't find what you need from there, check with
Uta Priss (on cc list above). If you had some difficulty
in finding what you need, let her know, and she can add
more navigational info to the web site. (020)
John (021)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/sio-dev/
Join Community: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/sio-dev/
Unsubscribe: mailto:sio-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SIO/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SharingIntegratingOntologies (022)
|