Re: What should I use: RDF, DAML+OIW, OWL, XTP, Future Ontology Spec...

You might like my MKR language (http://rhm.cdepot.net/).
It's much more human-friendly than RDF & OWL.
MKR is both English-like and UNIX-shell-like.

MKR is not a standard, but I'm slowly improving its ability
to work with the W3C standards.  For example, version 5.5 of 
MKE/MKR includes RDFS terminology and can read N-Triples.

MKR integrates knowledge representation & procedures & queries 
in one language.
============ 
Dick McCullough 
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jimmy Cerra 
  To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org 
  Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2003 12:47 PM
  Subject: What should I use: RDF, DAML+OIW, OWL, XTP, Future Ontology Spec...



  Ack!  There seems to be an explosion of Semantic Web standards being
  created.  The extreme genesis of the different specifications is making
  the decision to use one difficult.  What should I use?  RDF is the most
  widely used (thanks to RSS).  DAML+OWL provides a lot of missing
  features.  However, OWL will soon supplement DAML.  Still, RDF - and to
  a lesser extent DAML - are current standards and are implemented in a
  variety of applications.  Then there are Topic Maps, another 'mature'
  specification in a parallel domain as the W3C's efforts.  Finally, XLink
  also seems to provide an ad-hoc method to encode the Semantic Graphs
  between resources.

  I reiterate, what should I use?  Should I use OWL since for future
  compatibility?  Should I use RDF since it's the most widely used?  How
  about Topic Maps or XLinks?

  This TLA soup of the Semantic Web is driving me crazy.  I'm tempted to
  eschew everything in favor of SVG and encode the graphs as graphics!!!
  (I'm just joking... ;)

  Can anyone help me put all of this into perspective?

  --
  James F. Cerra