Just Launched: You can now import projects and releases from Google Code onto SourceForge
We are excited to release new functionality to enable a 1-click import from Google Code onto the Allura platform on SourceForge. You can import tickets, wikis, source, releases, and more with a few simple steps. Read More
From: Jeff Thompson <jeff@th...> - 2006-04-17 22:12:39
Hi. I have a few questions about the Cyclify project announced here:
1. Will the opencyc mailing lists (like this one) be the main discussion forum
2. If I find a possible bug in the ontology, will I send it to one of these email
lists (or the opencyc bug tracker)?
3. Cyclify is compared to the Wikipedia project. Already on the Cyc Foundation page
http://www.cycfoundation.org/ there is a reference to the concept of "ontology" that
gives a link to the Wikipedia article. This underscores that the Wikipedia article URL
is the de facto standard to referring to a concept on the web (not #$Ontology).
What are the plans in Cyclify to work with the fact that the Cyc-L names
won't be the de facto universal identifiers when a web user wants to link to a concept?
Will Cyc adopt a URL system? And map it explicitly to other identifiers like Wikipedia?
4. Wikipedia is already doing ontology stuff. Their Category system already does a lot
of what #$isa and #$genls does. And they are planning typed predicate tags. See
What is the vision of coordination as both WCyc and Wikipedia (and others) vie to have web users
contribute to the respective (huge) ontologies? Since the Cyc language and query engine will
always be much more rich than what Wikipedia will attempt, is the idea to just have Cyc
"scrape" the ontology of Wikipedia? Could there ever be enough friendship between the
projects so that a Wikipedia page has a built-in link to the Cyc engine to do serious natural
language queries (which Wikipedia will not likely attempt)?