W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > October 2002

Re: WebOnt response to RDF docs

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:42:34 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20021031.134234.21832822.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: hendler@cs.umd.edu
Cc: heflin@cse.lehigh.edu, www-webont-wg@w3.org

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Subject: WebOnt response to RDF docs (was Re: LANG: need to CLOSE Issue 5.6 Imports as magic syntax)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 10:33:18 -0500

> At 10:04 AM -0500 10/30/02, Jeff Heflin wrote:
> >Thanks for pointing this out, Peter:
> >
> >A particulary scary passage is from Section 2.3.3:
> >
> >Human publishers of RDF content commit themselves to the
> >mechanically-inferred social obligations. The machines doing the
> >inferences aren't expected to know about all these social conventions
> >and          obligations.
> >
> >The social conventions used to interpret a graph may include assumed
> >truths, for which no logical derivation is available, and socially
> >accepted consequences whose rules of deduction are embedded in arbitrary
> >decision-making processes.
> >
> >Semantic web vocabulary gains currency through use, so also do semantic
> >web deductions have force through social acceptance. Semantic web
> >deduction operates in a combination of logical and social (non-logical)
> >dimensions.
> >
> >
> >
> >They seem to be saying they don't want RDF to be used by agents, because
> >agents cannot possibly know these socially accepted consequences and
> >thus cannot make any rational decisions on the behalf of users. If this
> >is the W3C's vision of the Semantic Web then we may as well just shut
> >down the WG and go home, cause it is doomed to failure.
> >
> >Jeff
> 
> I was getting ready to send a reply to Jeff (don't think this is what 
> the RDF folks mean), but then realized that this is not the place for 
> it - that discussion should go to RDF-logic.  Please keep this 
> discussion focused on ONLY those aspects of RDF that directly and 
> materially effect language features of OWL.

I believe that this aspect (or whatever it is) of RDF materially affects OWL.

[...]

>   -JH

peter
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 13:42:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:53 GMT