W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2005

Re: Developers Guide to Semantic Web Toolkits for different Programming Languages

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:55:29 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20050208.175529.68196069.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: ora.lassila@nokia.com
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org

From: Ora Lassila <ora.lassila@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: Developers Guide to Semantic Web Toolkits for different Programming Languages
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 15:19:20 -0500

> Well, different *dialects* of Lisp are generally incompatible. 

Hmm.  Well, I was "privileged" to be programming in C++ when templates were
being added to the language.  Incompatibilities between the various C++
compilers and even between different versions of the same compiler were the
bane of my life then.  :-(

> Perhaps you
> are referring to using different Common Lisp *implementations* (and *closely
> related* -- but now mostly obsolete -- dialects such as Symbolics Lisp,
> etc.), between which there are only minor incompatibilities (often having
> something to do with the OS interface, threads, and like -- the stuff that
> the X3J13 committee didn't standardize).
> 
> The currently prevailing dialects of Lisp (Common Lisp & Scheme) do not even
> share the same syntax.

Well, I've never really though of Scheme as a dialect of Lisp at all,
instead viewing it as a related but different language, even though they do
share quite a bit of syntax (probably more than the various different
versions of C++ did when I was programing in C++).  Perhaps the common
understanding is different now.

> Since -- what I understand to be -- the intention of the report is to be a
> *practical* overview of existing Semantic Web toolkits, it makes a lot of
> sense to say "Common Lisp", since finding a Scheme-based toolkit will not
> help -- at all -- if it is Common Lisp that you want.

Agreed.

>     - Ora

In any case, this has gotten a bit far afield.  I only jumped in because of
the usual paranoia of those of us who do have some fond remembrances of
Lisp (Lisp 1.5, Interlisp, Symbolics Lisp, Common Lisp, etc.).  

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2005 22:56:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:44 UTC