[Om] OpenMath on the Semantic Web?
Professor James Davenport
jhd at cs.bath.ac.uk
Tue Feb 3 10:05:57 CET 2009
On Tue, February 3, 2009 12:41 am, Juergen Zimmer wrote:
> Dear Paul,
> I agree with your criticism.
> But you didn't mention the 'or' in
> '...there are no ontologies or other explicit semantics involved.'
> Maybe what the reviewers referred to was
> '...explicit formal semantics.'
> Ontology languages directly correspond to (some subset of) first-order
> logic with its classical formal semantics. That's something I haven't
> seen in OpenMath so far.
I would have thought SOME FMPs were such. I agree not all, which is
probably why more work needs to be done on FMPs. I really would like to
resurrect DefMP under some new (wider?) kind of FMP type=...
> In general, I have always regarded the parallel development of the
> Semantic Web and OpenMath (CDs) as a real pity, because in principal
> both communities more or less want the same thing.
Except that OM wants to be able to express things for which we have (as
yet, in some cases) no, or no reasonable, FOL expression.
> Anyway, that's my 10cents.
> Paul Libbrecht wrote:
>> Hello fellow OpenMathers,
>> I wanted to draw your attention to that blog post I made:
>> where I rant against a formal disqualification we endured while
>> claiming that an OpenMath research had to do with the semantic web.
>> Om mailing list
>> Om at openmath.org
> Om mailing list
> Om at openmath.org
Hebron & Medlock Professor of Information Technology
Formerly Undergraduate Director of Studies, CS Dept
Lecturer on CM30070, 30078, 50209, 50123, 50199
Chairman, Powerful Computing WP, University of Bath
OpenMath Content Dictionary Editor
IMU Committee on Electronic Information and Communication
More information about the Om