SUO: Re: Missing Ingredients
Tom and Murray,
Just one qualification:
MA> John has talked at times about use of controlled vocabularies,
> but even given the limitations imposed on communication by
> them still leaves open the question of interpretation on the
> part of author and reader.
I have never talked about using "controlled vocabularies".
What I have recommended is "controlled languages",
which I define as formal systems of logic that happen
to use a subset of the syntax of a natural language.
I don't have any starry-eyed visions of a controlled
language solving any of the problems of interpretation.
It would only enable people who say they hate logic
to read logic without realizing that they are doing so.
But I believe that giving people a language they can
read, such as Controlled English, is more promising
than giving them a totally unreadable language, such
as RDF or OWL. (Of course, that is not saying much,
given what I have already said about the semantic web.)
John Sowa