- From: Peter Vojtas <Peter.Vojtas@mff.cuni.cz>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:48:09 +0200
- To: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
All URW3 discussion participants, We can try to meet Tuesday morning before or after opening (that me http://kocour.ms.mff.cuni.cz/~vojtas/) and make an appointment for personal discussion (maybe Trevor can arrange a room?). Next year is also IPMU in Malaga, there is already a tradition of having session FLSW on Fuzzy Logic in Semantic Web, but now it would be more reasonable to organize our own and/or joint session? - deadline for special session proposal is in September - maybe/probably Malaga organizers will be in London too (of course our first personal meeting will be in Korea). Greetings Peter This bellow is a toy example and it depends on who said it and in what context - arranging a basketball team or medicine diagnosis or looking for a partner :-) Umberto Straccia wrote: > > > On Jul 19, 2007, at 10:22 AM, Trevor Martin wrote: > >> This is precisely the choice faced by implementers of logic >> programming + uncertainty languages .... you can extend the language >> and the inference mechanism or express and process the uncertainty >> within the standard language. >> >> tall(John) : 0.7 >> >> vs >> >> tall(John, 0.7) >> >> (... in both cases, without saying what 0.7 represents) >> >> The former approach gives you more control, reduces to "standard" >> notation when the uncertainty is omitted and (I think) makes the >> semantics clearer; >> the latter involves no change to existing notation (hence is easier >> to sell ) but gets messy when only some of the representation >> requires the uncertainty and obscures the meaning of the annotation. >> > > Not exactly, Trevor. What should be a minimal setting (you know that > there are 200+ citations about Logic Programming, uncertainty/ vagueness > ....) be ? What semantics? > > Even an expression of the form > > P(c1, ...cn): 0.7 > > is open to a pletora of semantic options ... > > What I say is is that > >> tall(John) : 0.7 > > > should rather be represented like (guided by the uncertainty ontology) > > sentence s IS tall(John) AND s HasTruthDegree = 0.7 > > Anyway, that's just my opinion ... > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2007 14:48:23 UTC