- From: Adrian Walker <adrianw@snet.net>
- Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 19:41:52 -0700
- To: "Phil Dawes" <pdawes@users.sourceforge.net>
- Cc: patrick.stickler@nokia.com, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Phil - A possible initial step towards automating the use of context is as follows. Be able to reason in executable English about rdf triples. The "Semantic Web Presentation" at our site** talks about adding such a layer of meaning. The examples called RDFQueryLangComparison1 and SemanticWebOntology1 at the same site suggest how to actually do it. Do you think that may that help? Cheers, -- Adrian ** www.reengineeringllc.com At 05:59 PM 10/8/2004 +0000, you wrote: >Hi Patrick, > >I'm afraid that the more work I do with rdf, the more I'm having >problems seeing URIQA working as a mechanism for bootstrapping the >semantic web. > >The main problem I think is that when discovering new information, >people are always required to sort out context (a point made by Uche >Ogbuji on the rdf-interest list recently). > >When identifying new terms, some mechanism has to exist to decide >whether the author's definition of the term fits with its use in the >instance data, and that that tallies with the context in which the >system is attempting to use the data. To my mind this prohibits a >system 'discovering' a new term without a human vetoing and managing >its use. > >Of course this doesn't prohibit the decentralisation of such >context-management work - e.g. a third party could recommend a >particular ontological mapping of terms based on an agreed context. I >just don't see machines being able to do this work on an ad-hoc basis >any time soon. > >You've been doing a lot of work on trust/context etc.. in addition to >URIQA, so I'd be interested to hear your views on this. > >Many thanks, > >Phil
Received on Saturday, 9 October 2004 23:40:35 UTC