Re: Logic and Using The Semantic Web Toolbox

"Sean B. Palmer" wrote:

> Yes, I see: TimBL seemed to be implying that logic is inherent to any RDF
> type system, in fact even more basic that most of the RDF Syntax model
> itself...

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "logic".   I think RDF (labeled
directed graphs) entails a commitment to representation, relationship, and
identity:  hence a commitment to the foundations of language.  But I think there
is more to logic .... things like the law of the excluded middle come to mind.
If you look at it from an anthropological perspective, humans must have had
language far longer than they had logic.   Personally I think this logic stuff
is far too new to take seriously.

Logic is great!  But survival is better :))

> of course this still begs the question:-
> What namespace do we use for logic assertions, i.e. how can we add it to the
> basic tenet of RDF?

I thought that was what DAML-ONT was all about.  Isn't it?

> A question I am still perplexed by. If this logic is essential to moving RDF
> to the next stage, why wasn't it built in in the first place, or specified
> in a satellite draft?

Maybe, perhaps, because it is *not* essential to moving RDF to the next stage.
I think that the use of RDF for applications that attempt to tame the wilderness
of the semantic web for use by individuals like you and me will be far more
important than mere logical inference.  After all logic sometimes gets us into
lots of troubles .... ever talk with a binary type person?

Seth Russell
authorOf: http://robustAI.net/ai/symknow.htm

Received on Thursday, 30 November 2000 21:06:40 UTC