W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > May 2001

RE: What do the ontologists want?

From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 08:06:54 -0400
To: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001f01c0dd37$87f2ccf0$0201a8c0@ne.mediaone.net>
pat hayes wrote:
> Can you (or anyone) say why the ability to quote is considered a
> practical necessity? From where I am standing it seems an arcane and
> exotic ability, not one that is of central practical importance. What
> is the practical utility of being able to refer to a predicate,
> rather than use it?

In reading a particularly apropos and curious email discussion  regarding
the history of XML
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200105/msg00375.html, it occurred to
me that representing email exchanges (http://www.openhealth.org/xmtp# )is
another practical example of how representation of quoting is generally

Indeed it is considered good ettiquite to start one's response with an
attribution. Thankfully most archiving packages do provide a thread level
view. (e.g.

And of course I second, or third, the absolute need for this in healthcare

Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2001 08:07:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:45:37 UTC