W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2002

RE: (SeWeb) Re: KAON - KArlsruhe ONtology and Semantic Web Infrastructure

From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 13:16:57 +0200
To: "Arthur T. Murray \(by way of \"Ralph R. Swick\" <swick@w3.org>\)" <uj797@victoria.tc.ca>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EBEPLGMHCDOJJJPCFHEFCEMOIAAA.danny666@virgilio.it>


> > Interesting to reflect on the fact that ontologies were (partially)
> > introduced to enable interoperability between application systems.
> > Now we are seeing interoperability-problems between ontology systems.
> > Do we need to recurse once more, to solve this problem?
>
>No, we need to create truly artificial Minds such as
>http://mind.sourceforge.net/mind4th.html -- AI in Forth.

I'm a big fan of 'artificial mind' approaches, but it doesn't actually help
very much in this case: the problem just moves from AI <-> ontology or AI
<-> existing data interoperability. (not to mention web hacker <-> Forth
interoperability ;-)

Personally I don't think the interoperability problems anything like as bad
as suggested - on the RDF level at least the language is common, and if the
domain of discourse is the same between different applications (even if it's
the ontologies themselves) then interoperability shouldn't be difficult.

If there is a common, higher-level language such as OWL available that isn't
blindingly complex, then tool builders will tend to try and support it. This
is what has happened with XML, and with ontology tools has been happening
with RDF, and to some extent with DAML+OIL. There will undoubtedly be other
(perhaps 'higher') levels of incompatibility between internal models, but
the overall interoperability & utility will be increasing.

Cheers,
Danny.
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2002 07:28:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:56 GMT