which context should you use?

I'm not ready to answer that question now.
The purpose of this note is to clarify some of the issues involved.
The issues apply to RDF, OWL, CYC, but I will focus my attention on OWL.

When you execute "ke -owl",  you are in the context
    at view = owl;
When you execute "ke -mkr", you are in the context
    at view = tabula rasa;
There are many differences between these two contexts.
For now, I will limit my attention to the following concepts
which are included in "tabula rasa", but not in "owl".
(ke "knows" all these concepts, but your OWL
knowledge representation does not.)

    question
    action/command/method (includes space,time)
    n-ary relation
    universal NSM concepts found in all languages
    other concepts of interest to me but not to you

1, I defined the "owl" context so that you could pursue your own goals
using only OWL.  In this case, MKE is just a tool to help you use OWL.
You do not have to be "distracted" by other concepts from "tabula rasa".
Be assured -- there are many more concepts in "tabula rasa" -- you might
find it difficult to isolate the concepts which interest you.

2. If you're ready to experience the joy of full MKR, you can use "tabula 
rasa".

3. If you would like to use OWL + one or more of the concepts above,
a special context can be defined for that purpose.

4. Just a reminder -- ke "knows" some OWL, but is still a novice.
Teaching ke to "speak" better OWL has not been a high priority for me.
ke also "knows" how to use Linux/Windows commands.

Let me know what you think.
I am seriously interested in helping you do your job.

Dick McCullough
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;
http://mKRmKE.org/

Received on Saturday, 3 February 2007 21:43:19 UTC