Re: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ... three questions based on the last telecon]

Nice, I would prefer to first run a search for web pages of second hand car shops, then I would like to run an extractor (as I assume that these pages are human oriented (and even sometimes machine protected)). This all to be able to compare all retailer at Vancouver area (I assume these are many - at least in Czech we have many).
     Another possibility of course is that some shops run as web service - this is another story.
I am used to model such requests by my f-EL@ fuzzy logic (see short comment in URSW2006), roles are crisp (as data on the web are crisp (e.g. Ford, 5000$)), my concept of good car is an aggregation of degrees of particular attributes and compute top k objects (again depending how are cars sorted, how do I access them, ...)
     Peter


Please note my changed address Peter.Vojtas@mff.cuni.cz



----- Original Message -----
From: Umberto Straccia [mailto:umberto.straccia@isti.cnr.it]
To: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
Subject: Re: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ...  three questions  based on the last telecon]


> 
> 
> On Jul 25, 2007, at 1:09 PM, Peter Vojtáš wrote:
> 
> > Example is nice, but I would stress to use web examples, even if it  
> > is in an article on the web, somebody says ...XY...is tall, but he/ 
> > she does not claim tall:0.7, we have to tend to more realistic web- 
> > examples (e.g. in our use cases). I agree it depends on the  
> > society, circumstances,.... are we going to model also these? Peter
> >
> >
> 
> Here a pretty Semantic Web oriented query example:
> 
> QUERY:= "I'm would like to buy a second hand compact car, my budged  
> id around $15000 and it shouldn't have more than approximately 30000  
> kilometers, preferably with air conditioning and airbag, dark color  
> and available in the Vancouver (Canada) downtown area."
> 
> How may represent this information need in OWL like, RDF like or Rule  
> (RIF/RuleML/SWRL) like languages ?
> 
>  -Umberto Straccia
> 
> 
> > Please note my changed address Peter.Vojtas@mff.cuni.cz
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
> > To: Peter.Vojtas@mff.cuni.cz
> > Cc: Kathryn Blackmond Laskey [mailto:klaskey@gmu.edu], public-xg- 
> > urw3@w3.org, Umberto Straccia [mailto:umberto.straccia@isti.cnr.it]
> > Subject: Re: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ...   
> > three questions   based on the last telecon]
> >
> >
> >> Peter,
> >>
> >> We would always like to have "exact" information, but any measurement
> >> has a degree of inexactness/uncertainty based purely on the  
> >> preciseness
> >> of the measuring instrument.  At a crime scene, a suspect may be
> >> described as tall but the accuracy depends on what the observer
> >> considers tall, the vantage point from which the observer saw the
> >> suspect, and whether the suspect was wearing shoes with heels.  Also,
> >> was the suspect tall in the context of a society where the average
> >> height is 162 cm or 175 cm?  Making use of the fact that the suspect
> >> was "tall" requires many assumptions, most of which are implied in
> >> conversation but never explicitly stated.
> >>
> >> What does this tell us about what needs to be represented in terms of
> >> uncertainty?
> >>
> >> Ken
> >>
> >> On Jul 24, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Peter Vojtáš wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I personaly would prefer to know the exact height of John and decide
> >>> on my background and intention whether he is or not tall.
> >>>      So I am afraid that I do not understand where such an  
> >>> information
> >>> can appear
> >>> Peter
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Please note my changed address Peter.Vojtas@mff.cuni.cz
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: Kathryn Blackmond Laskey [mailto:klaskey@gmu.edu]
> >>> To: Umberto Straccia [mailto:umberto.straccia@isti.cnr.it],
> >>> public-xg-urw3@w3.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ...  three
> >>> questions  based on the last telecon]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> .... 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)
> >>>>
> >>>> Independent of which way we go on tall(John) : 0.7 or tall(John, 
> >>>> 0.7),
> >>>> it will not be enough just to annotate sentences with a number
> >>>> expressing some degree of certainty or plausibility or  
> >>>> membership or
> >>>> whatever.  To do probabilistic reasoning, we need to be able to  
> >>>> make
> >>>> conditional independence statements, and to express conditional
> >>>> probabilities. To do probability tractably depends on  
> >>>> representations
> >>>> composed out of local modules, and these local modules are
> >>>> parameterized by conditional probabilities, not absolute
> >>>> probabilities.
> >>>>
> >>>> K
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> >> ---
> >> -----
> >> Ken Laskey
> >> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305      phone: 703-983-7934
> >> 7151 Colshire Drive                         fax:       703-983-1379
> >> McLean VA 22102-7508
> >>
> >>
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2007 17:22:44 UTC