what makes Arxana special?

Gents,

I've been talking with Elephant's developer Ian Eslick about "what
makes Arxana special?" -- or, as he put it, "what makes it kick ass
over existing approaches?".

The one thing I have been able to come up with is that in Arxana you
can make assertions about assertions. I don't know of other systems
that let you do this. (OK, there are systems like this in Logic, but
I am talking about hypertext systems.)

Suppose I say:

a lizard is a mammal

In Arxana, this would get saved as

assertion_alpha = (a lizard, is a, mammal)

or something like that.

You can come along and say:

assertion_beta = (assertion_alpha, has truth value, false)

Now it is your word against mine. (Which could be taken to imply:
when triples are created, certain data about the creator will be
uploaded automatically. If I am the proverbial zit-faced
thirteen-year-old and you are the proverbial Nobel Prize Winning
biologist, then most people will take your side. Some people may
still be interested in knowing that I made a bunk assertion and trying
to understand why or what they can do about it.)

I am specifically thinking about this system opposed to the systems
developed for the Semantic Web. I am pretty sure that while the
Semantic Web allows you to make all kinds of frame-like systems:

JoeCorneli isa Human
JoeCorneli hasGender Male
JoeCorneli isWearingGarment Kilt

etc., it does not let you make assertions about specific filled slots.

The fact that I can make assertions not just about the statement

JoeCorneli isWearingGarment Kilt

*in the abstract* but the unique "assertion_gamma" that represents
"is" this assertion seems like a special and very useful feature of
the Arxana system.

I could be wrong -- this may not be a special feature -- it may not be
an exceptionally useful feature. But in any event, it seems to be the
feature that sets Arxana apart from other semantic network style
systems that I know of.

As for how assertions about assertions could be a kick-ass feature, my
guess is that one way is that it can be used to override leaky
abstractions. If someone makes a frame with slots like:

A: a car has four wheels
B: a car runs on gasoline

I can go in and rip this to shreds with commentary.

Comments? (Please!)

END NOTE

In Arxana we can (and do) make assertion about assertions in the
abstract, but perhaps such statements are only "evaluatable" with
respect to Theories. For example: perhaps the assertion

JoeCorneli isWearingGarment Kilt

is true in the theory I'll call "Joe's Day Today". It may be false in
the theory "Joe's Day Tomorrow". In any event, the words are the
same; but we may want to take the two versions as "different
statements" when they appear in different Theories.