On 2/20/15 10:09 AM, Paul Houle wrote:
So some thoughts here.OWL, so far as inference is concerned, is a failure and it is time to move on. It is like RDF/XML.
I think that's a little too generic a comment. Describing the nature of relations using relations is vital.
Not all of OWL is vital, at the onset. Basically, OWL doesn't need to be at the front-door per se., but understanding its role, in regards to relations semantics description and exploitation is important.
RDF/XML's problems have tarnished OWL, as it has the notion of a Semantic Web in general. For starters, too many OWL usage examples (circa., 2105) are *still* presented using RDF/XML :(
The creation and management of RDF/XML is THE real problem. It messed up everything, and stayed at the fore front (as the sole official W3C RDF notation standard) for way too long. Exponential decadence++ par excellence!
As a way of documenting types and properties it is tolerable.
Methinks, very useful.
If I write down something in production rules I can generally explain to an "average joe" what they mean. If I try to use OWL it is easy for a few things, hard for a few things, then there are a few things Kendall Clark can do, and then there is a lot you just can't do.On paper OWL has good scaling properties but in practice production rules win because you can infer the things you care about and not have to generate the large number of trivial or otherwise uninteresting conclusions you get from OWL.
You need both, with rules being much clearer starting points for users and developers.
It's a journey back to Prolog [1] i.e., long awaited 5GL == Webby Prolog.
As a data integration language OWL points in an interesting direction but it is insufficient in a number of ways. For instance, it can't convert data types (canonicalize <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> and "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>"), deal with trash dates (have you ever seen an enterprise system that didn't have trash dates?) or convert units. It also can't reject facts that don't matter and so far as both time&space and accuracy you do much easier if you can cook things down to the smallest correct database.
Task better handled via rules. Links:[1] http://www.jfsowa.com/logic/prolog1.htm -- A Prolog to Prolog by John F. Sowa (Last Modified: 11/07/2001 14:13:17) .
-- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
