W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2000

SV: RDF and the rest of the world

From: Greg FitzPatrick <gf@medianet.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:59:45 +0100
To: <R.van.Dort@Everest.nl>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Funny thing about that "top level ontology" you sent us to, is that nothing
seems to be more recent there than 1997?


> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> Från: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]För R.van.Dort@Everest.nl
> Skickat: den 1 mars 2000 09:47
> Till: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Ämne: RDF and the rest of the world
> There are lots of interesting discussions in this forum.
> On the other hand I get a real 'deja vu' following the vivid
> discussions on
> items beyond core RDF.
> Knowing a bit of the developments at Cycorp (www.cyc.com) I see
> some wheels
> being reinvented.
> Cycorp has developed a knowledge base, an inference engine, a query and
> manipulation language and -last but not least- a comprehensive set of
> content consisting of abstract microtheories containing real-world
> knowledge.
> Regarding discussions on 'thing' and 'resource': see one of the top level
> ontologies that you can access after signing the guestbook at
> http://www.cyc.com/cyc-2-1/index.html
> 'Thing' is an oftenly used top-level concept but I must admit that
> "Resource Description Framework" sounds better than "Thing Description
> Framework".
> Resource description is our context.
> There are many other initiatives worldwide: WordNet has been referred to
> earlier in this forum; there is also OntoBroker and the Wave /
> CKML efforts
> (Robert E. Kent et al).
> Let us focus on the basic items for RDF and link to work done by others
> later on.
Received on Wednesday, 1 March 2000 05:00:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:29 UTC