Re: BCNGroup Roadmap for Semantic Technology Adoption

On 4/7/06, adasal <adam.saltiel@gmail.com> wrote:

>  So, if I am right, and I have no idea if I am, then currently there is a
> code bias that the no UFOs and the production of lots of little ontologies
> left to fight it out amongst themselves fits well in to.

I see no obstacle to any UFO, quite the opposite. The WordNet
vocabulary (ok different, but having a lot of points in common) is
referred to in many of the the little ontologies. I for one haven't
really come to grips with what's in Cyc, but quite a few people are
using their ontology for reference points. The overall strategy may be
different, but I don't see any conflict.

>  As to your other comments, I have no idea, but I am not sure how well put
> your position is. With respect, wouldn't it suffice just to say that Danny
> didn't seem to be following your point of view?

Thank you, that's how I would have liked to have put it. I'd like to
take the opportunity to apologise to Dr.Prueitt for any offence I may
have caused and dive out of these particular discussions.

Cheers,
Danny.

--

http://dannyayers.com