Re: basic decisions underlying DAML-ONT

>
>
>The separation between the declarative language and the inference engine(s)
>is actually rather old.  The line of development from KLONE to KL-ONE to
>NIKL to LOOM to POWERLOOM lives in this arena.  One could say that all
>first-order reasoners live in this arena whether they are partially
>complete or not.  I suppose that this point could even be stretched to
>complete description logic reasoners, as there are multiple inference
>engines available for many description logics.  These engines are even
>qualitatively distinguishable based on behaviour.  (For example, DLP
>quickly solves some formulae that KSAT cannot effectively solve, and vice
>versa.)

Peter-
  I think this is a different type of separation than those, but don't 
want to belabor the point.  I've been around KR a long time too, and 
I've never seen a system that allows a large number of people in 
diverse areas contributing to a huge and inconsistent knowledge base 
with different ontologies allowed to coexist and sets of different 
reasoners that all interoperate -- that's the bold new world we enter.
  Rest is a discussion for another time and higher bandwidth.
  -JH

p.s. I should probably mention somewhere, and this message is now it, 
that all my opinions expressed on this list are my own, and do not 
necessarily reflect the official opinions of DARPA, the US Air Force 
Science Board, the US Department of Defense, or any other 
governmental or non-governmental organization.

Dr. James Hendler		jhendler@darpa.mil
Chief Scientist, DARPA/ISO	703-696-2238 (phone)
3701 N. Fairfax Dr.		703-696-2201 (Fax)
Arlington, VA 22203		http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler

Received on Thursday, 12 October 2000 14:43:42 UTC