Re: The semantics of new-ediFritz Lehmann <email@example.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 1994 01:35:33 -0800
From: Fritz Lehmann <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: The semantics of new-edi
Organization: GRANDAI Software
In article <199412201554.AA11369@world.std.com>, on bit.listserv.edi-l,
Dale R Worley <worley@WORLD.STD.COM> wrote:
>OK, a "conceptual graph" can eliminate a number of these problems.
>But is the technology of conceptual graphs well enough developed that
>it can deliver in practice?
I believe so. The conceptual graphs research community
has done (mostly very good) work for ten years. This includes
a lot of natural-language (particularly lexical) work. The
interchange language will soon be standardized. Other research
communities inside and outside of AI will be able to share
ontological sub-systems with conceptual-graphs-based systems.
>It's tough to make an application program work in the face of
>incomplete or variable data, but it's even harder to build it so it
>can actually understand what the variants of the data "mean".
Agreed. The ontology-based approach involves a lot of hard
work, and fairly sophisticated work at that. This work is being
done now in universities and in (mostly proprietary and
unnecessarily secret) corporate projects. I do not know who
will do this work for EDI concepts.
Yours truly, Fritz Lehmann
GRANDAI Software, 4282 Sandburg Way, Irvine, CA 92715, U.S.A.
Tel:(714)-733-0566 Fax:(714)-733-0506 email@example.com