RE: WebOnt General Requirements Subgroup - Initial E-mail

>......
>================
>Justifications of Ns & ?s
>-------------------------
>N> data persistence
>N> security
>N> xml interfaces
>?> internationalization
>
>are part of the metadata layer of semantic web architecture (RDF), not part
>of the ontology layer.

I fail to follow this distinction. (I know it is taken from the 
'layer cake' slide. I fail to follow it there as well.) RDF, for 
example, is surely a (simple) ontology language. Do y'all have some 
idea that metadata is somehow distinct from , and more primitive 
than, ontology? (?? In what sense?)

>RDF might not offer adequate answers yet but the
>problems should be fixed there.

Maybe xml and internationalization (maybe), but I don't see any way 
to isolate security and data persistence issues from the ontology 
'layer', wherever that happens to be.

>There may be internationalization issues that are part of the ontology
>layer; but most i18n is in the metadata layer.
>
>N> ontology-based search
>N> ontology querying
>
>I think these are later work. I would expect standardization of metadata
>layer query to precede that of ontology layer query. There is no sign of
>metadata layer query standardization so I think WOW-G should duck ontology
>query standardization.
>
>?>user-friendly
>
>"If you want friendly get a dog"
>The language is for machine to machine communication. Friendliness is for
>apps on top of it.

I tend to agree with that sentiment, though I doubt if it will fly 
with the DOH (ontology equivalent of DPH)

Pat

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes

Received on Monday, 10 December 2001 15:09:52 UTC