[ontoiop-forum] DOL finalisation

[John F Sowa]

On 12/27/2017 9:17 AM, rick wrote:
> Ten years gone and there's no reference implementation, right?

Logicians have been using, analyzing, proving theorems, and
publishing papers about versions of predicate calculus for
almost 140 years without having a reference implementation.

> A consumer of 24707 and standards which depend on it assume
> significant risk.

That risk is trivial compared to the risk they assume for using
the 99% of ISO standards that do not use any version of logic.

And that risk is insignificant compared to 99.9% of the applications
on the WWW that use some version of what they call "Semantic Web".

I'm not defending the lack of a reference implementation for CL.
But the "state of the art" of ISO standards does not require and
very rarely uses any version of logic.

For example, the proposed ISO standard for ontology requires the
use of OWL and/or CL to specify an ontology.  I suggested that they
should use one or the other of those logics (or just some plain
vanilla version of FOL) to supplement the vague English definitions.

The response I received is that it is not ISO's policy to use
any version of logic to define the terminology of a standard.

John