W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > December 2005

Re: Introductions

From: <stan.devitt@agfa.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 16:12:03 -0500
To: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFAA652196.784BBBF6-ON852570CF.006EDDB7-852570CF.00745650@agfa.com>

Stan Devitt, Agfa
Alternate for Agfa, NOT Attending F2F

-- a bio summarizing experience you have that's relevant to the work of
this group   (see http://www.agfa.com/w3c/sdevitt/)

My background is in complexity theory, formal languages and computer 
algebra.  I was heavily involved the the conception and development of 
MathML from the beginning with primary focus on capturing semantics 
for content MathML. 

I have served as an XML consultant on several mathematics
education projects that have built on knowledge representation and the
automated display and construction of proofs for academic publishers. 
I have taught mathematics and computing for many years and currently 
teach operating systems  at the  University of Waterloo, Canada. part 

My focus at Agfa is on capturing semantic inferences and on the
application and use of  automated  reasoning and proof technologies
to improve the quality and effectiveness healthcare.

As an author of MathML and several related W3C notes (see the relevant
parts under http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-editor#D) I bring a lot of experience
in the development of a system facing some similar demands: (ie.,
capturing detailed semantics, recognizing and flagging subtle differences,
identifying and settling on key features, and building in extensibility,
and coordinating with alternative representations such as OpenMath)

As a researcher at Agfa I am actively using many of the underlying
rule based systems.  We have had to deal with (for example) issues
related to declarative versus procedural issues for rules - something
which looks to be important in this context.

-- What do I hope to get out of the group.

We need a good interchange format in order to have flexibility in
using proof based technologies.  Our experiences until now have shown
that different tools and systems (all with a common underlying theme of
declarative rule based systems) As we delve further into the application
of proof based technologies the need to test accross systems, and/or to
combine their strengths is very apparent.

I want to be sure the the specifications coming out of this group can meet
our needs - with special attention to extensibility and the mechanisms
used to handle procedural and declarative issues.

-- What do you expect to contribute

I can contribute my experience in dealing with mathematical semantics in
an extendable fashion, and in the W3C editorial process, and my current
experience as a potential consumer of the end product with real needs
and requirements.

Stan Devitt
Received on Tuesday, 6 December 2005 21:12:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:07:18 UTC