• To: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 20:40:12 -0400
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F8CF@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F8CF@h...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Windows/20040502)

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> 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.
> 
more or less orthogonal to the analogical vs logical
question, because Sowa keeps pointing out that a controlled natural 
language is just another syntax for logic, fully equivalent to any other 
such syntax.

Cheers,

Tom P

• References:
  • RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re: InfoWorld agrees with Elliote Rusty Harold)
• Next by Date: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Previous by thread: RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Next by thread: RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread