[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
AndrewWatt2000@aol.com writes:
>Doing it in single limited-scope problem domains may be reasonably
>easy, but finding a general solution seems fairly daunting. At least
>to me.
>
>I appreciate that we are a long way from, for example, having data
>routinely stored in a semantically-meaningful (is that a meaningful
>term?) way but shouldn't we be exploring ways to move towards that?
No. I:
* don't believe a truly general semantic solution is possible;
* would consider a general solution to be a straitjacket;
* have little patience for entrepreneurs who hope to make a lot of money
with "controlled knowledge" of any sort;
* and have little patience for visionaries who think computers should
answer all our questions.
So no, I don't think aiming for a general solution is a good idea. The
spin-offs may of course be interesting, but as targets go, there are
lots more with immediate rewards, far lower costs, and less pretension.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
