- From: Ziv Hellman <ziv@unicorn.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 19:23:57 +0200
- To: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <6194CD944604E94EB76F9A1A6D0EDD230E5567@calvin.unicorn.co.il>
But if the Semantic Web is going to be useful to both people and machines, and not just machine-readable protocol, then aesthetics are going to play a role whether you like it or not. Make two tools available for the people, one taking aesthetics into account and the other not, it seems bloody more likely that the crowd will gravitate towards the aesthetic one. Remember, the Semantic Web is eventually going to have to play to sell-out crowds if it is going to fly. -----Original Message----- From: pat hayes [mailto:phayes@ai.uwf.edu] Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 6:30 AM To: Ziv Hellman Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org Subject: RE: What do the ontologists want Jim Hendler declared at the beginning of the DAML work that 'purely aesthetic' arguments would not be permitted to influence the design of the language, which applied in this context is a pre-emptive strike against any arguments based on the observations you produce. The fact that the entire world of mathematics, logic, and database engineering has chosen to use relations freely, is in the end only an aesthetic argument. It is *possible* to get used to the ugliness, inefficiency and style-cramping awkwardness that a purely binary language imposes, rather in the way that it is possible to get used to midwestern cooking. Transmission speeds are so fast, and memory so cheap, that any linear losses in information density do not have any really nasty economic consequences; so I have decided to let the clowns win this particular battle. If people wish to automatically translate an efficient notation into an inefficient one, just let them do it. Microsoft will do it anyway, whatever we decide. I personally will continue to use relational languages in my own ontology work (in fact, KIF allows for variably polyadic relations, which can take any number of arguments, a distinct expressive advantage which makes many axiomatizations wonderfully compact: kudos to Mike Genesereth for thinking of it) but I doubt if the Semantic Web will. Best wishes Pat Hayes --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Saturday, 19 May 2001 12:24:53 UTC