Dear Sjir, (01)
Ref. our [ontolog-forum] message archives -
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-01/threads.html#00083 (02)
Our system tries to maintain message threading on our discourse (i.e.
the online "conversation".) (03)
While I have previously asked members of the community to change the
subject line when appropriate (to reflect a changed topic,) the
reverse is also true - we should keep the subject line, and hence the
message threading, when we are still on the same subject/topic. (04)
I would therefore, suggest that you refrain from making that change to
the subject line (unless the subject/topic has actually morphed into
something else, in which case, please re-word the subject line to
reflect the topic) as your addition (of the date index) to the subject
line seems to be breaking the system (as intended.) (05)
Thanks & regards. =ppy (06)
Peter Yim
Co-convener, Ontolog
-- (07)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sjir Nijssen <Sjir.Nijssen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:30 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] What is Data? What is a Datum? 2013-01-09-0930
To: "edbark@xxxxxxxx" <edbark@xxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum]"
<ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (08)
+1 (See further below) (09)
Sjir Nijssen (010)
Chief Technical Officer (011)
PNA Group (012)
Tel: +31 (0)88-777 0 444 (013)
Mob: +31 (0)6-21 510 844 (014)
Fax: +31 (0)88-777 0 499 (015)
E-mail: sjir.nijssen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (016)
------------------------------------------------------- (017)
http://www.pna-group.com (018)
Van: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Namens Ed Barkmeyer
Verzonden: dinsdag 8 januari 2013 23:12
Aan: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Onderwerp: Re: [ontolog-forum] What is Data? What is a Datum? (019)
On 1/8/2013 3:11 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: (020)
On 1/8/13 2:23 PM, doug foxvog wrote: (021)
A datum is a role played by a proposition, as John Sowa said. A single (022)
value is not a datum unless it represents a proposition. (023)
Sure, but doesn't context determine role in this situation? Of course, (024)
said determination might be implicit rather than explicit which is (025)
ultimately inevitable. Thus, when _values_ are in the role of (026)
representing the description of an observation subject, they denotation (027)
"Data" applies. Likewise, if the aforementioned is achieved via a single (028)
value, then the denotation "Datum" would apply. (029)
I think this confuses John's assertion that a "datum" is a "role" of a
proposition. He takes the view that the proposition plays a role in
the assertion that it is true, and that role is called "axiom" or
"fact". I would just have said that a datum is a proposition that is
taken to be, or asserted to be, true. The context for that role is
any context in which the proposition is taken to be true. (030)
If the context of appearance of the datum is in a report, and you
trust the author of the report, then the datum/proposition is taken to
be true. That context has nothing to do with the subject of the
report, or the "subject" of the datum, or the the spreadsheet it
appears on, or anything the like. The context is only the acceptance
that the proposition is true. (031)
The context of representation of a datum is "quite another thing
entirely". I agree that a "value" may be considered to represent a
datum, when the context of its appearance determines both the relation
to which it is (in most cases) an argument, and the "subject", which
is an/the other argument. So, in the context of my driver's license,
the "value" T labeled date-of-birth is interpreted as the proposition
(person.has.date-of-birth EdBarkmeyer T), and that proposition is
taken to be true. (Some "values", such as "true" or "false" and
"yes" or "no", are representations of assertions involving unary
predicates. For example, the value "yes" in the blank following "US
Citizen?" is taken as a representation of the assertion
(person.isUScitizen EdBarkmeyer).) (032)
So, in such a representation context, each value or tuple of values is
in the role of representing one proposition about the subject.
Assuming one respects the observer and takes these propositions to be
true, each proposition represents an observation, and "data" is simply
a set of observations. (I think Kingsley's term "description of"
means "set of observations about".) That, unsurprisingly, pretty much
coincides with the use of the term "data" in science and statistics. (033)
Propositions (or data objects) are not restricted to triples (subject / (034)
predicate / object, subject / verb / object, entity / attribute / value, (035)
entity / key / value, ...). Some propositions naturally require higher (036)
arity, e.g., X is 3 meters from Y. (037)
Sure, but triples are an effective base upon which higher arity can be (038)
built, right? (039)
In a word, No. It is certainly possible to represent a semantically
ternary relation as a set of triples, but that is a "form of
expression". It is a transformation of the semantic intent into a
grammatical structure. I agree that the idea "semantically ternary"
may be dubious, since we are learning more and more about the complex
bi-directional relationship between language and thought. But the
point here is that a triples language (we won't name any names)
restricts the expression of intent in a way that requires
circumlocution for some simple semantic concepts. That is not at all
the same idea as being a "base on which higher arity [of intent] can
be built". (040)
Doug said: (041)
Propositions represented by subject - (042)
predicate - direct object - indirect object in English (Juan gave Xue (043)
the book) can be modeled by reifying the action and conjoining multiple (044)
ternary propositions, but a single higher-arity proposition can be useful (045)
for many purposes. (046)
As I said above, it is more than that. An atomic idea, like A being
between B and C, does not conceptually involve multiple relations. Of
course, it is always possible to do the Davidsonian thing: There is a
between-ness S, and the agent of S is A and the patient of S is an
ordered pair P and the first member of P is B and the second member of
P is C. But then that pattern can also be applied to "Cain killed
Abel", which a triples language can, and does, represent atomically.
The problem is that the triples language does not formally adopt a
Davidsonian representation of states with a fixed set of binary
relationships. It simply adopts circumlocutions when it cannot
represent an atomic concept atomically. (047)
The single higher-arity proposition is useful because it is semantically atomic. (048)
Sure, but you always need a building point that provides foundation (be (049)
permanent or temporary). (050)
Well, you need a grammar for every representation language. That is
the structural foundation. If you choose a grammar in which verbs
have only a subject and a direct object, you will force a lot of
thoughts to be phrased using circumlocutions, because there is nothing
natural about that restriction. Indo-European languages have evolved
a number of other grammatical elements to augment binary verbs in
expressing intent. Triples languages have not. (051)
-Ed (052)
-- (053)
Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx (054)
National Institute of Standards & Technology (055)
Systems Integration Division, Engineering Laboratory (056)
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528 (057)
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 Cel: +1 240-672-5800 (058)
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST, (059)
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." (060)
Kingsley (061)
-- doug (062)
On Tue, January 8, 2013 08:13, John F Sowa wrote: (063)
... The word 'proposition', for example, (064)
is more fundamental than the words 'assertion', 'statement', 'judgment', (065)
'assumption', 'belief', 'hypothesis', 'axiom', or 'theorem'. Therefore, (066)
it is reasonable to say that Proposition is the natural type, and the (067)
other words describe roles that a proposition can play. (068)
The words 'datum' and 'data' most definitely describe roles. (069)
On Mon, January 7, 2013 19:29, Melvin Carvalho wrote: (070)
On 7 January 2013 23:25, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: (071)
On 1/7/13 5:04 PM, Gary Berg-Cross wrote: (072)
... (073)
"data object" is much clearer [1] i.e., a resource comprised of (074)
structured (075)
data. Typical representation, for a given perception medium (e.g., the (076)
World Wide Web or paper) is a subject->predicate->object, (077)
subject->verb->object, entity->attribute->value style of graph pictorial (078)
:-) (079)
I used to talk to people about "predicate / object" and mainly would get (080)
blank stares. (081)
I tried "attribute / value" which seemed to have *slightly* more (082)
understanding. (083)
I'm adding to my terminology to term "key / value pairs" which I think may (084)
be effective to some audiences (085)
Links: (086)
1. http://bit.ly/PnTJdV -- understanding data objects . (087)
Kingsley (088)
Gary Berg-Cross, Ph.D. (089)
gbergcross@xxxxxxxxx (090)
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?GaryBergCross (091)
Potomac, MD (092)
240-426-0770 (093)
_________________________________________________________________ (094)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ (095)
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ (096)
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (097)
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ (098)
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (099)
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (0100)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
_________________________________________________________________
To Post: mailto:ontolog-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-admin/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (0101)
|