xml-dev - Re: RDF, the "semantic web",and the nadir of AI (was RE:Realisticproposa

[Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>]

KenNorth wrote:

> > Standard vocabularies for domains were pretty well
> > understood by scholastics in the middle ages.  That
> > wasn't AI.  It was common sense.

    Common sense is a property of humans, not machines! The proper machine
encoding of common sense would be deserving of a Nobel Prize (in something)
IMHO. Perhaps that is why AI seems so easy but is in actuality so hard.

>
> Some time ago I wrote a Web Techniques article that discussed NLM's MeSH,
> domain vocabularies, and search engines such as WHIRL (which uses pattern
> recognition to support similarity searches). My suggestion was we should
> integrate the techniques. Use domain experts to build vocabularies, with
> machine analysis to continually scan and analyze the literature to surface
> new terms that have entered the vocabulary of practitioners.
>

A hot topic. For a preview of my RDF modelling of the healthcare spec which
gives a couple of RDF Schemas and their graphical representations (note,
this is but a preview and is not necessarily intended to be part of any
actual spec) see:

http://www.openhealth.org/ASTM/healthcare-model.gif
http://www.openhealth.org/ASTM/clinical-model.rdfs

http://www.openhealth.org/ASTM/E31.25-model.gif
http://www.openhealth.org/ASTM/E31.25-model.rdfs

and
http://www.openhealth.org/ASTM/operative-report.gif
http://www.openhealth.org/ASTM/operative-report.rdfs

the idea is that as actual operative reports, and other reports,  are fed
into the system a semanticly meaningful database actually gets created.

Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group
http://www.openhealth.org