The bottom line is very clear and I agree. (01)
John said: (02)
"Therefore, UF should be very rich in types, but very, very
poor in axioms. But any serious inferencing (which may be
logic based, statistical, computational, or whatever) will
require much more. But every system that adds more does
so in ways that are incompatible with some other system." (03)
I have a resource that would remove the OWL axiomatization and move use back
to RDF ... (04)
How do you see the types beings expressed, "as RDF statements" purely with
some small set of constraints? (05)
I am very interested in this proposal. (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (07)
|