RE: DAML+RDFS: potentials for simplifications?

[Removed SUO list from CC:]
> From: Seth Russell [mailto:seth@robustai.net]
> > From: "Jeen Broekstra" <jbroeks@cs.vu.nl>
> > On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 Joachim.Peer@unisg.ch wrote:
[...]
> > > it would be cool to be able to "upgrade" software agents
> > > simply be importing an extension module which (in your
> > > case) could  contain:
> > > - a number of RDF triples (representing axioms of a higher
> > > level ontology schema like daml+oil)
> > > - a number of RQL queries, that provide some kind of
> > > inference patterns.
[...]
> > I am also unsure whether this idea of flexible addition of
> > expressivity is feasible at all. The problem to me seems to
> > be that you need a starting point that is itself at least as
> > expressive as the language that you are trying to "learn",
> > which kind of defeats the purpose of the undertaking.
> 
> Sure, it's feasible!   Follow the database records to where 
> the rules are
> coded in a language that is understood by your programs.  
> Here, this is one way you could do it:
> 
> http://robustai.net/mentography/disjointWith.gif

All this does is to shift the burden onto ever-more-complex programs, of
whatever nature, that must then be embedded into all Semantic Web-aware
clients.  Unless, Seth, you have found a way around Godel's Incompleteness
Theorem [1]?

		- Peter

[1] http://www.ddc.net/ygg/etext/godel/godel3.htm