SUO: Re: Web-based ontology browsers
Seth,
The problem with plain text is that it does not have the mathematical
symbols that I love to use. That's why I use LaTeX or MS-Word.
Furthermore, my documents have several types of components, which I feel
necessary:
1. the formal KIF axioms
2. discussion of the background theory
3. discussion of the KIF formalization
4. tables
5. figures and diagrams
6. sectioning
Solutions?
BTW, MS-Word converts to HTML, but in a very bloated manner. So this
probably will not be desired.
Robert E. Kent
rekent@ontologos.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
To: "Robert E. Kent" <rekent@ontologos.org>; "Philip Jackson"
<phil.jackson@computer.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Web-based ontology browsers
> Well I would suggest just plain text. But I think we would need to agree
on
> how statements are to be separated. Perhaps any number of line feeds
> greater than one would imply a new statement. Then it's relatively easy
to
> read that into a local program that would add the extra fields that Philip
> wants on the db, and generate a tab delimited record to be uploaded to
Coda
> for everybody to see (and mutate?). If you can send me a sample of the
> statements in plain text, I could write a quick program to whip them into
> the format that the Coda site wants, and also upload them if Philip wants
me
> to.
>
> Seth
>
>
> create the kind of tab delimited
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert E. Kent" <rekent@ontologos.org>
> To: "Philip Jackson" <phil.jackson@computer.org>
> Cc: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>; "Adam Pease"
> <apease@ks.teknowledge.com>; "SUO" <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 11:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Web-based ontology browsers
>
>
> > Phil,
> >
> > I certainly appreciate the effort you have put into organizing the Coda.
I
> > am currently writing IFF using MS-Word (mea culpa -- I am actually a
LaTeX
> > devotee) and then translating it to PDF using Adobe Acrobat. I am
willing
> to
> > use any word processing software, but would like to write it just
*once*,
> > and then have some extracting software put it into a Coda format and a
> > browsable format. Is this possible?
> >
> > Robert E. Kent
> > rekent@ontologos.org
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Philip Jackson" <phil.jackson@computer.org>
> > To: "Robert E. Kent" <rekent@ontologos.org>; "Seth Russell"
> > <seth@robustai.net>; "Adam Pease" <apease@ks.teknowledge.com>
> > Cc: "SUO" <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 5:12 AM
> > Subject: Web-based ontology browsers
> >
> >
> > > Robert Kent wrote:
> > >
> > > > It would be nice to get the IFF Foundation Ontology into a more
> > browsable
> > > > format, whether hosted in the Teknowledge browser or other, and I am
> > > > definitely open to such a development. But right now I am very
> > > > busy working
> > > > on version 2.0 of the IFF Foundation Ontology (concept lattices).
> > > > If anyone
> > > > could help accomplish this (perhaps you Seth), I would very much
> > > > appreciate
> > > > it. I have put a small bit of the IFF ontologies into Philip
Jackson's
> > > > Common Ontology Development Architecture (Coda)
> > > > [https://www.quickbase.com/db/6urbwpxk] and SUO Coda Ontology
Modules
> > > > [https://www.quickbase.com/db/6ztfq6sg]. Given that rather
> > labor-intensive
> > > > effort which was done by hand, I would strongly recommend some more
> > > > automated method.
> > >
> > > It might be possible to automate the addition of information to Coda,
> > though
> > > I do not have the bandwidth to work on this. If anyone else has
> bandwidth,
> > > I'd be glad to correspond with them about it.
> > >
> > > That said, if Coda remains too labor-intensive then it should probably
> go
> > > into the experimental dustbin, though people working on other
ontologies
> > may
> > > wish to judge its ease of use for themselves. Coda can also be used
> simply
> > > as a way of maintaining definitions of terms like perdurantist and
> > > endurantist -- something that could still be a good idea...
> > >
> > > The Coda data structures are oriented toward support of IFF, including
> > > representation of ontology modules. If a different web-enabled
framework
> > is
> > > used for IFF and/or any other modular ontology, then perhaps that
> > framework
> > > could benefit from using data structures similar to Coda's...
> > >
> > > Phil Jackson
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>