[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Can you tell me why decidability was given that
level of importance? This is what I meant by
"over-engineered" when I could have said "over-specified".
There is a paper from TimBL on the issue of FOL
and the SemWeb at
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Logic
which I have trouble following not being well-trained
or just not able to determine his conclusions. Dan
Connoly comments on it elsewhere. At first, I thought
it the case that the notion was to not require FOL
so that other logic systems could be used as needed,
or as in the spirit of HTML, to make initial fielding
easy and get some mind share. Your arguments make
me unsure because requiring decidability would seemingly
make it harder and cut the SemWeb away
from uptake of where the majority of the world's
business semantics reside: relational databases
with client or server based business rules and logic
in the form of code libraries. This would appear
to limit the role of the semweb to being merely
metadata about web pages, and that isn't that useful.
So that can't be right.
len
From: Miles Sabin [mailto:miles@milessabin.com]
And this is where the constraint that Len was complaining about bites:
the base-level logical frameworks being considered for the SW insist on
decidability, and that excludes many practically useful, tho' formally
undecidable first-order theories.
|
