• To: 'Michael Champion' <mc@x...>
• Subject: RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 16:28:32 -0500
• Cc: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>

I believe the answer is yes, or at least, analogical 
reasoning is doable.  I'll post that question to the CG list.

http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/analog.htm

Sowa has taken the position that we'd be better 
off with something closer to natural languages, BTW.

len


From: Michael Champion [mailto:mc@x...]

Given the prevalence of analogy over logic in real human 
thought and discourse, does anyone know whether formal ontologies can 
effectively represent analogies?  Hmml, Google finds 
http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/papers/Files/IAAI02KForbus.pdf ...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• Prev by Date: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Next by Date: Extreme 2004 Program Now Available
• Previous by thread: RE: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re: [ xml-dev] InfoWorld agrees with Elliote Rusty Harold)
• Next by thread: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread