W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2004

RE: Concept Map VS Topic Map.

From: Lynn, James (Software Services) <james.lynn@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 12:17:57 -0400
Message-ID: <5A5CC5E87DE62148845CC96C8868900E015C95B0@ataexc02.americas.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

Thanks Tom, I'll poke around with this.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Thomas B. Passin
> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 10:27 PM
> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Concept Map VS Topic Map.
> 
> 
> 
> Lynn, James (Software Services) wrote:
> > Tom,
> > 
> > Do you happen to have an example of how to prove theoroms using CGs?
> 
> If you can find a copy of John Sowa's 1984 book "Conceptual 
> Structures",
> he covers this starting on page 150.  Also see  p 10 ff in 
> "Conceptual 
> Graphs for Knowledge Representation", Mineau, G., Moulin, B., 
> and Sowa, 
> J. (eds) (1993).  Sowa's book "Knowledge Representation" 
> (2000) Also has 
> some material starting on page 301.
> 
> > I'm thinking primarily about the mechanical (coding) aspects. It it
> > just "path crunching"?
> > 
> 
> The rules of inference for CGs can be found at
> 
> http://www.jfsowa.com/cg/cgstand.htm#Header_59
> 
> I don't know anything about coding aspects, however.  I do know that 
> it's not just "path crunching", though.  Here is a part of the URL 
> referenced above -
> 
> "# Erasure. In a positive context, any graph u may be replaced by a 
> generalization of u; in particular, u may be erased (i.e. replaced by 
> the blank, which is a generalization of every CG).
> 
> # Insertion. In a negative context, any graph u may be replaced by a 
> specialization of u; in particular, any graph may be inserted 
> (i.e. it 
> may replace the blank).
> 
> # Iteration. If a graph u occurs in a context C, another copy 
> of u may 
> be drawn in the same context C or in any context nested in C.
> 
> # Deiteration. Any graph u that could have been derived by 
> iteration may 
> be erased.
> 
> # Equivalence. Any equivalence rule (copy, simplify, or 
> double negation) 
> may be performed on any graph or subgraph in any context."
> 
> 
> You could ask on the CG list, cg@cs.uah.edu.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Tom P
> 
> -- 
> Thomas B. Passin
> Explorer's Guide to the Semantic Web (Manning Books)
> http://www.manning.com/catalog/view.php?book=passin
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2004 16:18:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:57 UTC