• To: "XML DEV" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Data vs. Process was Re: Vocabulary Combination ...
• From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
• Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 21:49:51 +0100
• In-reply-to: <000701c3287d$67c9b040$b6f5d3ce@L565>
• References: <r01050400-1026-C6111F0C946C11D7B5F00003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]> <000701c3287d$67c9b040$b6f5d3ce@L565>
• Sender: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
• User-agent: KMail/1.5.1

Jonathan Borden wrote,
> When a pharmacist sees a drug interaction that the doctor hasn't, the
> intention is to flag this, and contact the doctor for more
> instructions ... this is exactly what ontologies (and schemata in
> general) are great at: spotting inconsistencies.

Uh huh ...

And to bring this back to the starting point of this thread: haven't you 
just described a _process_?

Cheers,


Miles

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Data vs. Process was Re: VocabularyCombination ...
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• References:
  • Re: Data vs. Process was Re: Vocabulary Combination ...
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Data vs. Process was Re: Vocabulary Combination ...
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Data vs. Process was Re: Vocabulary Combination ...
• Next by Date: Re: Data vs. Process was Re: Vocabulary Combination ...
• Previous by thread: Re: Data vs. Process was Re: Vocabulary Combination ...
• Next by thread: Re: Data vs. Process was Re: VocabularyCombination ...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread