On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Seth Russell wrote:
> "Sigfrid Lundberg, Lub NetLab" wrote:
>
...
> Hmmm ... it seems to me that we can never ever get any meaningful
> semantics without emerging up into the discourse level of dialogue,
> which rdfs refuses to do. So maybe that's why nobody seems satisfied
> with the rdfs semantics ... taint there.
Euhm. What do you mean by "discourse level of dialogue"? That a dialogue
cannot take place unless a given statement possesses both semantics and
syntax?
> > I'll give up that effort when I see how to
> > achieve that, or if I find some software that does it for
> > me.
>
> Put the semantic memory in the client ... we call that the sembrowser.
> Of course that idea would have fought with the whole dot com craze ...
> thank god it died. I think semantic webbing is going to have an
> entirely different feel, culture and texture than the www .... people
> just aren't use to it yet ... and i guess its a good thing too cause
> there just are no popular tools out there.
>
> > Schematron might be a good idea anyway, however, if an
> > applications profile have requirements as regards obligation.
>
> I almost understand what you're saying .. sounds like you're at the
> dialogue level. Got any schematron tools that i can easily run on a
> Win32 ?
Any XSLT processor will do
Sigge
> --
> Seth Russell
> http://RobustAI.net/MyNetwork/index.html
> http://robustAI.net/MyNetwork/StickeyCyberMolecules.html
> Http://RobustAi.net/Ai/Conjecture.htm
>
|