W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2006

Semantic Layers (Was: Interpretation of RDF reification)

From: Adrian Walker <adrianw@snet.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 12:39:28 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>
Cc: Azamat <abdoul@cytanet.com.cy>, semantic-web@w3.org, Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <leo@mgn.ru>, semantic-web@w3.org

John --

Good to see you pointing out that, for serious knowledge use, we need to 
additional semantic layers and tools above RDF and OWL .  I agree.

Actually, at a general level, I guess the W3C "Semantic Web Layer Cake" 
indicates this too.

However, we may need to push the envelope even further than logic, or 
Common Logic.  At some point, the real world meaning of things like


has to be made clear to nontechnical human beings.  This is argued in 
[1,2], and there's also an online system that demonstrates how this can 
work in practice [3,4] .

                                            Cheers,   -- Adrian

[1]  www.semantic-conference.com/program/sessions/S2.html


[3]  reengineeringllc.com/Oil_Industry_Supply_Chain_by_Kowalski_and_Walker.pdf

[4]  Internet Business Logic.  Online at reengineeringllc.com

Internet Business Logic (R)
Executable open vocabulary English
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com
Shared use is free

Adrian Walker
PO Box 1412
CT 06011-1412 USA

Phone: USA 860 583 9677
Cell:    USA  860 830 2085
Fax:    USA  860 314 1029

At 08:21 AM 3/26/2006 -0800, you wrote:

>Azamat, Leonid, et al.,
>I agree.
>AA> The hot polemics over the subject is likely caused by the
> > fact that one determinant dimension of meaning has not received
> > a due attention in the SW formal languages. Additionally to
> > syntactic and semantic aspects, there is a pragmatical meaning
> > involving an agent's mental states and communicative acts
> > (speech events in a certain speech situation, or context).
>RDF and OWL are legacy systems that must be supported, but
>semantics, pragmatics, and ontology are where the action is.
>RDF and OWL are too limited, clumsy, and inefficient to support
>any serious work in knowledge representation and reasoning.
>An enormous amount of effort in the SemWeb literature addresses
>workarounds for getting up to the level where AI was in the 1980s.
>My recommendation is to import anything in those languages into
>Common Logic and do the real work with CL-based languages.
>John Sowa
Received on Sunday, 26 March 2006 17:39:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:50 UTC