Re: SUO: Program Semantics
Bill Andersen a écrit :
>
> On 3/29/02 22:30, "Bill Andersen" <andersen@ontologyworks.com> wrote:
>
> > Camp A: We'll call this Microsoft camp for convenience. Believes that
> > having a standard stock of categories of sufficiently broad reach and
> > functionality that users will be attracted to use it, thereby achieving
> > interoperability more or less by fiat. This approach is completely
> > pragmatic, laying no claim to, but willing to borrow from.
>
> Have to fix my own message... The last sentence should read "This approach
> is completely pragmatic, laying no claim to, but willing to borrow from
> theory in whatever field may have something to offer"
Too bad for the Microsofties that with their "pragmatic" approach they will
get engulfed forever in a myriad of nasty little problems that will suck up
the time and ressources of countless people and organisations.
Just like they are currently with security problems which, I believe,
will *never* get solved because you cannot properly fix that kind of
mistakes after the fact, when the causes are spread all over millions
and millions of lines of code.
So, does anyone really feels like following the "Microsoft" route
in dealing with ontologies?
We should make a poll.
Cheers.
-- Jean-Luc Delatre
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Trying to secure this is like trying to make water not wet"
- Bruce Schneier, talking about PDF encryption
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://perso.club-internet.fr/jld/ -- GSM: +33 6 11 24 06 29