Brickley
Cc: Matt Williams; public-semweb-lifesci hcls
Subject: RE: Evidence for backing statements
This would be a good time to begin collecting use-cases from HCLS for the URW
(Uncertainty Reasoning for the Web, http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/urw3/)
incubator group involving uncert
AIL PROTECTED]>, "Dan Brickley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Matt Williams"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "public-semweb-lifesci hcls"
Subject: Re: Evidence for backing statements
On May 18, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Eric Neumann wrote:
am I correct to assume t
Eric --
You wrote...I see several potential categories of uncertainty, some
around the current reification discussions; here's a starter list that is by
no means exhaustive: 4. ???
Here's my 2 cents worth for item 4.
I'd say that an application or a reasoner that uses RDF or other
On May 18, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Eric Neumann wrote:
am I correct to assume that within HCLS, all RDF statements we are
considering are not facts, but assertions, that may in the future
be proven false, but never proven true?
I am very excited to hear this will be a W3C focused activity.
Sta
This would be a good time to begin collecting use-cases from HCLS for the URW
(Uncertainty Reasoning for the Web, http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/urw3/)
incubator group involving uncertainty, beliefs and probabilities...
I see several potential categories of uncertainty, some around the curre
On May 18, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
Matt Williams wrote:
I've been lurking & reading the discussion with interest.
It might be worth pointing out that there is an ongoing attempt to
classify/ represent evidential links/ weight/ etc. started in the
legal domain by people suc
Dear Dan,
That is interesting. My thesis (3/4 done) is on integrating Ontologies
(using OWL-DL or OWL 1.1 as an exemplar) with Argumentation (which is an
extension of previous work in NM logics) to represent conflict. I'm
using Breast Cancer therapy choice as a domain.
I'll have a look at t
Matt Williams wrote:
I've been lurking & reading the discussion with interest.
It might be worth pointing out that there is an ongoing attempt to
classify/ represent evidential links/ weight/ etc. started in the legal
domain by people such as Wigmore and continued by people such as David
Sc
I've been lurking & reading the discussion with interest.
It might be worth pointing out that there is an ongoing attempt to
classify/ represent evidential links/ weight/ etc. started in the legal
domain by people such as Wigmore and continued by people such as David
Schum & William Twining.
