From: mburke ([email protected])
Date: 04/05/02

I agree with David Martin's assessment of the need as well as Jim's
assessment of the Web Site.
I think some of the best arguments for DAML from the DOD standpoint are in
Jim's initial proposal within DARPA to get the initiative started.  Of
course, his proposal argues why we need a research program more than why
someone should adopt and use DAML in the next few years.  I believe the key
DAML interest in DARPA/IXO is related to the potential support it provides
for information integration which in turn enhances timely military
While I disagree with John Lemmer it is always nice to hear from the
Murray A. Burke
Program Manager
3701 N. Fairfax Drive              Phone: 703-696-2303
Arlington, VA 22203-1714      Fax:     703-696-2203
mailto: [email protected]        DSN:          426-2303
-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Hayes [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 1:20 PM
To: Jim Hendler
Cc: [email protected]
At 2:35 PM +0000 4/4/02, Lemmer John F Civ AFRL/IFTB wrote: 
As a potenial DAML +OIL user, but one who will probably not go that route,
here is my 2 cents worth.  Every new thing like DAML exits somewhere in a
tradeoff between academic elegance and practical utility.  From what I see
of DAML, it is way to far from utility and way to close to (attempted)
It seems DAML is re-fighting (and still not winning) the wars the KR
community has been struggling with for at least the last 20 years.
It is so good to see our Air Force researcher lab staff so open-mindedly
examining a new technology
Oh come on: DAML isn't a NEW technology. Its a description logic, is all,
rendered into a barbaric notation, and with a botched interface to a
triple-store mechanism (for which botching I bear part of the blame, to be
honest) and burdened with an ill-defined commitment to using URIs as
universal identifiers in some as-yet-still-unspecified way.
 - I hope that this will not come back to haunt them during AFSAB reviews.
I'd love to hear from John why he thinks that DAML is not winning - I cannot
remember another AI language that ever has had so much public interest, web
use, and moved into standardization by a major body -- in fact, in hype we
probably lag behind the old expert systems days, but in acceptance we seem
to be moving beyond and winning acceptance.  Perhaps the military seems to
be moving slow (as usual), but the Web Ontology Working Group includes such
small companies as Intel, Daimler-Chrysler, EDS, Fujitsu, HP, Intel, Lucent,
Nokia, Philips Electronics, and Unisys -- with a couple of other big players
talking to me about joining.  There's also a rumor around that IBM Research
has included Semantic Web-related work in their strategic plan -- in short,
we're seeing a positive interest that had not been seen in this way in the
past (except maybe for the expert systems days - which all these companies,
and many of the rest of the Fortune 500, are using regularly).
Sure, keeping a keen eye on what the SW is up to, particularly once one has
already paid ones W3C membership costs in any case, is probably a no-brainer
for any significant IT company. Endorsing DAML+OIL is something else again,
 Perhaps John's message helps explain why Air Force F-16s are flying with
240,000 lines of Jovial code in their controllers and why the DoD is still
maintaining that Corba, not Java, is the language of the future...
If F-16s ever get controllers written in Java then I'm going to hide
p.s. John - you're lucky I'm not the PM anymore - if you sent a messgae like
the above when I was PM you'd be looking for another program to support.
Now, now, Jim! You know its not considered good form to threaten the
servants, even if they do annoy you sometimes with their talkative ways.
Professor James Hendler                           [email protected]
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies         301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.      301-405-6707 (Fax)
AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland                College Park, MD 20742
IHMC                                       (850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.                        (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501                      (850)202 4440   fax
[email protected]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 03/26/03 EST