On Thu, June 17, 2010 11:17, David Eddy said:
> On Jun 17, 2010, at 10:49 AM, doug foxvog wrote: (01)
>> The two properties in this
>> case could be named "Struck_Over_The_Counter" and
>> "Traded_Over_The_Counter" (02)
> Given that party the first calls it "Over the Counter" and party the
> second calls it "Over the Counter" by what means or motivation are
> you going to get them to use "Struck" & "Traded?" Dock their pay? (03)
You misunderstand. I am referring to internal names of terms (those in the
ontology). A user need not know such internal names, much less explicitly
use them. Many ontologies and encoding systems, e.g. GeoNames, use names
that are strings of digits or mostly digits. Users need not remember
16-digit strings. (04)
In this case, each party can use "Over the Counter" as input to their API.
Each API could output "Over the Counter" for the property it uses. I
would assume that there would be different APIs tailored to the different
tasks and needs of the different types of users. (05)
There is no reason that an API should restrict its input/output to the
program's internal names for what its dealing with. You don't require
a user to use Java, C++, COBOL, or full RDF names; why should it be
any different for names of semantic terms within a name space? (06)
> Just because a database engine is artificially constrained to using
> unique keys, that's just not how humans work. (07)
Of course. (08)
> I would suggest presenting to humans multiple meanings/definitions
> for "Over the Counter" & making it very easy to choose which they
> mean. I'm not an expert in this field, but I would be surprised if
> there are only two meanings for OTC. (09)
There would likely be no need to present an option to users. The API
coder can just use the term that is expected in the context in which it
is operating. (010)
I do agree that it would be nice *to be able to* present a meaning for
any term the user enters or is presented, and to present such a descript-
ion upon request. (011)
> The way humans work ... are: "I'm right, you're wrong"...
> I guaranteed you senior management is NOT going to
> step in here & urge the parties to use "correct" language. (012)
> Next approach, please. (013)
> ___________________
> David Eddy
> deddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 781-455-0949 (014)
=============================================================
doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org (015)
"I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
============================================================= (016)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (017)
|