Re: ANSI standards and knowledge representationTimothy Finin <Tim.Finin@cs.umbc.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 1994 09:56:21 -0400
From: Timothy Finin <Tim.Finin@cs.umbc.edu>
To: email@example.com (Erik Sandewall)
Subject: Re: ANSI standards and knowledge representation
Erik Sandewall writes:
> Additionally, I propose that the typographical basis should be LaTeX
> and not ASCII. In other words, rather than defining expressions in the
> language as sequences of ASCII characters that can be read by
> COMMONLISP, they should be LaTeX expressions which can both be
> presented in normal "textbook" style, and can be read by specialized
> parsers. That overhead is certainly acceptable.
Interesting idea. Wouldn't SGML be better for this though? SGML was
designed to capture the structure of a document (which is what's
important here) rather than the lower level presentation information.
There are good tools for converting SGML to other document languages,
such as HTML, LaTeX, RTF, etc so presentation per se is not a problem.
There is a nice parallel here -- SGML is a kind of interlingua for
document descriptions which we would then be using as a basis for
encoding an interlingua for knowledge.