Mike - (01)
On May 31, 2010, at 1:30 PM, Mike Bennett wrote: (02)
> We don't rely on words for meanings, and I see no reason why anyone
> would. Terms are either Things or Facts, and each of these has a label
> which happens to be whichever word business domain experts are most
> comfortable with, and any number of synonyms which are other words
> with
> the same meaning. (03)
This looses me. (04)
Best as I've experienced, humans tend to be strongly attached to
terms/words/phrases having meanings. I am NOT in favor of using
numbers to represent meaning to humans. (05)
Naturally a huge issue here is that I see a word, recognize it & am
comfortable with the implicit meaning. You see the same word, which
evokes a different meaning (say "Table" in context of running a
meeting, not furniture, in American English & UK English). We're
both comfortable with what we assume to be the meaning, but one of us
is wrong. (06)
What I want to see is a term/word/phrase/acronym plus various
available CONTEXTUAL meanings. In a document where there are
potentially ambiguous terms, there could be "footnotes," tags, or
"hovering help" expressing explicit meaning. (07)
What do you mean by "Terms are either Things or Facts"? (08)
___________________
David Eddy
deddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)
781-455-0949 (010)
_________________________________________________________________
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-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (011)
|