ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] CL, CG, IKL and the relationship between symbols in

To: Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:23:06 -0600
Message-id: <p06230915c3ba84987396@[192.168.1.2]>
At 8:58 AM -0800 1/21/08, Duane Nickull wrote:
>What about a site like http://www.audi.com ?
>
>IT automatically redirects to another site based on geographical location.
>I am in Canada but get the US audi site.  In Germany, one would encounter
>the german site.
>
>It is a better example?    (01)

Its an example of why the W3C TAG insist on 
referring to 'web resources' or 'information 
resources' rather than anything as concrete as a 
Web page. They want to be able to say, in cases 
like this, that there is a single "thing" at the 
end of that one URI, which is able to respond in 
a variety of languages, and its that "thing" that 
is denoted by the URI. There are a number of 
cases like this, sometimes resolved by Mime type, 
eg if your browser is set to read aloud rather 
than display visually, it might get sent 
different HTML than a conventional browser is 
sent. BUt it would be the same 'web resource', 
just webarch:represented differently.    (02)

Pat    (03)

>
>D
>
>
>On 1/20/08 4:33 PM, "John Black" <JohnBlack@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>  Re: [ontolog-forum] CL, CG, IKL and the relationship betwThe
>>  following is an attempt to summarize (and reformat in plain text)
>>  a long discussion about the context-independence of  URIs so that
>>  I can respond to Pat's last response.
>>
>>  Originally I lamented that it was unfortunate that the W3C's
>>  architecture documents did not distinguish between the
>>  establishment of a URI and each instance of its use. My complaint
>>  was that this prevented using the context of the use of an
>>  instance of the URI when interpreting it.
>>
>>  PH> The key point is, what would count as a 'context' for a
>>>  context-dependent URI?
>>
>>  PH> Consider this scenario. You, sitting at your computer, use
>>>  a URi to browse an interesting website, and you send me an
>>>  email telling me about it and citing the URI. I then, sitting
>>>  at my
>>>  computer, two days later on the other side of the planet, type
>>>  that URI into my browser. We expect that we will see the same
>>>  website: but what do our two contexts have in common? It might
>>>  be almost nothing: the times, places, browsers, countries,
>>>  users,
>>>  OSs, maybe even cultural and linguistic settings, can be
>>>  completely
>>>  different. It is inherent to the Web that the contexts of
>>>  publication
>>>  and of use of a URI can be arbitrarily different and far apart
>>>  on
>>>  every dimension, yet the URI is supposed to retain its meaning.
>>
>>  JB>> In the following example, the differing 'contexts' are the
>>  different
>>  web-pages upon which occurrences of a URI appear.
>>
>>  JB>> Your scenario is not applicable here. We need the following
>>>>  scenario. You, sitting at your computer, use URI-A to browse
>>>>  to an interesting web-page upon which you see a small graphic,
>>>>  retrieved by an occurrence of URI-CD, which refers to an
>>>>  assertion that the web-page you are viewing is written in
>>>>  valid XHTML 1.0.
>>
>>  JB>> This is URI-CD:  http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10
>>
>>  JB>> What this URI is intended to denote is this assertion (from
>>  the
>>>>  W3C help page: http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html) "To
>>>>  show
>>>>  readers that one has taken some care to create an
>>>>  interoperable
>>>>  Web page, a "W3C valid" badge may be displayed (here, the
>>>>  "valid XHTML 1.0" badge) on any page that validates."
>>
>>  PH> The URI denotes that badge/image/web-resource/thingie.
>>>  There is only one of it, and it, itself, is never used to make
>>>  any
>>>  assertions. The HTTP protocols supply us with a copy
>>>  (webarch:representation) of it, and we can then use that copy
>>>  to human:assert something about the page the copied image
>>>  is on. OK, lets agree on all that.
>>
>>  PH> But notice that the [speech] 'acts' here ...<snip>... are
>>>  intrinsically dynamic things, events that occur in time and
>>>  within a social context (a 'web conversation', perhaps), not
>  >> textual or even indexical entities. It is the act of displaying
>>>  the "place order" button which constitutes the making of the
>>>  offer, not the button itself.
>>
>>  PH> The name of the badge denotes the badge. USING a TOKEN of
>>>  that badge in a certain way MAKES an assertion. But the name of
>>>  the badge doesn't denote the assertion made with a copy of the
>>>  badge. It also doesn't denote the web page on which the copy
>>>  occurs, or the time of day when it was published, or a host of
>>>  other things closely associated with it.
>>
>>  PH> You miss my point. I am conceding that one can use the image
>>>  to make an assertion. My point is that the image is not
>>>  identical
>>>  with the assertional act that uses it, nor with the content
>>>  that is
>>>  expressed by such an act.
>>
>>  What then is the assertional act that makes this image into an
>>  assertion? Just this, I propose, a person takes the assertional
>>  act of embedding a token of that URI,
>>  "http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10";, into her HTML page and
>>  publishing the page to the web. And because the resulting
>>  assertion is indexical, the assertion thus made is different for
>>  each web-page that a TOKEN of that URI is embedded into.  Are we
>>  still agreed?
>>
>>  Now consider the word, "I", the first-person English pronoun.
>>  There is just one English word "I".  Copies of it, tokens as you
>>  say, when embedded in speech or text, can be used by a speaker to
>>  denote that speaker who so embeds it. To denote (or name) that
>>  word we use a token of it, in quotes.  And we say of the word
>>  named "I" that it denotes the speaker that embeds it in a
>>  sentence, that it is indexical, etc. Can't we similarly say of
>>  the URI named "http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10";, that it
>>  denotes the assertion which is made when a web-page author takes
>>  the assertional act of embedding a token of it in his web-page,
>>  that it is indexical, etc.?  You keep insisting that the URI
>>  denotes the image, but to me that would be like saying the word,
>>  "I", denotes some 16-point, black-ink image of the letter "I" on
>>  a paper page. To me both the black-ink "I" image and the w3c
>>  badge image are just vehicles for delivering content.
>>
>>  By the way, I would like to point out that some of the questions
>>  in this discussion may apply also to the ISO Common Logic (CL)
>>  specification. In the CL Requirements section 5.1.3, "Common
>>  Logic should be easy and natural for use on the Web" there is
>>  this statement, "b. URIs and URI references should be usable as
>>  names in the language". And in the "...syntax and semantics"
>>  section 6.3.1 "Importations and named phrases", where it states,
>>  "All texts which are published and identified on a network
>>  *shall* be mutually interpretable with all other texts on the
>>  network which can import them, over the same universe of
>>  reference and domain of discourse, and with their vocabularies
>>  merged."
>>
>>  John Black
>>  www.kashori.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>>  _________________________________________________________________
>>  Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>  Subscribe/Config: 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 Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>--
>**********************************************************************
>"Speaking only for myself"
>Senior Technical Evangelist - Adobe Systems, Inc.
>Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com
>Community Music - http://www.mix2r.com
>My Band - http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury
>Adobe MAX 2008 - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/08/adobe-max-2008.html
>**********************************************************************    (04)


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC            (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.    (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                       (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                        (850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes    (05)


_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: 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 Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (06)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>