| Question asked
|
Section 1 of the paper proposes CNL as "an … Section 1 of the paper proposes CNL as "an ideal candidate to increase transparency of the Semantic Web and to empower non-specialists with a 'seemingly informal' language to work in co-operation with computers." This seems to be the premise of the paper. However, the abstract states: "There is no need to formally encode this knowledge in an RDF-based notation." Section 4 also states: "Specifications in CNL are translated ... into a format that can directly be processed by SATCHMO." It is not actually shown that CNL actually interfaces to current semantic web technologies/standards/syntaxes/etc. Perhaps it is obvious for assertional statements and terminological statements, but conditional statements seems less intuitive (in terms of representation in the current semantic web). Sure, SATCHMO can handle them, but what about other systems? Do the conditional statements correspond to any existing ''standard'' rule language? o any existing ''standard'' rule language?
|
