Re: Bridging the Terminology Gap using OWL ... an exciting example (updated)

Hi Roger,

A few comments on your new example.

* On Slide 21, I don't understand how the Bot determines that the
aperture value of 4.0-4.5 exceeds the minimum value specified by
the query (4.5-5.6). Also, I don't know if this issue is important
to your example. Maybe it's a detail that can be safely handled behind 
the scenes?

* A similar comment for determining that the shutter speeds match.
Is this just a string match between the contents of the two "<shutter-speed>"
tags?

* I wonder if more OWL features could be used to allow the Bot to truncate
the search on the basis of the desired features expressed in the query and 
the camera hierarchy given on Slide 19. 

For instance, it's not the case (or, we can suppose for the sake of 
argument that it's not the case) that there exist any 75-300mm zoom
lenses for large-format cameras. There may be no zoom lenses at all for 
large-format cameras. If there are, one could quickly come up with a 
range of possible focal lengths for such zooms. Maybe think kind of 
knowledge about zooms for large-format cameras could be encoded into OWL? 
(I really don't know; I haven't studied OWL carefully enough even to 
hazard a guess).

If it could, then when the Bot finds stores with "Large-Format" instead 
of "SLR", it would know that although "Large-Format" is a kind of camera, 
the request 75-300 zoom lenses is out of range. So, then the Bot could 
truncate its search more quickly. ??

* Oh, and please consider all the photography comments I sent you to be 
issued with a standard disclaimer on their truth or appropriateness. I think 
they're all accurate, but, well, it was late and ... :-)

Jim

> Hi Folks,
> 
> I have updated the camera example using information that I received from
> Jim Farrugia (thanks Jim!).  Here is the updated example:
> 
>     http://www.xfront.com/owl-quick-intro/sld015.htm

Received on Sunday, 6 April 2003 11:09:34 UTC