[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Lightweight, middleweight, and heavyweight semantics

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: David Eddy <deddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 12:36:15 -0400
Message-id: <11375982-5502-4C23-B373-83BEC7812DC0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
John -    (01)

On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:20 AM, John F. Sowa wrote:    (02)

> To make the distinctions memorable, good labels are necessary.
> I suggest the following four levels of semantics:
>   0. Zero semantics:  Data with no explicit semantics of any kind.    (03)

Obviously I like this idea of "graded" labeling.    (04)

But I'm having a hard time getting my noodle around "Data with no  
explicit semantics of any kind."    (05)

If there's no semantics, WHY has it been collected?  (Thinking in  
terms of enterprise systems such as accounting, securities trading,  
HR, etc.)  Surely it must MEAN something to someone?    (06)

David Eddy
deddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx    (07)

781-455-0949    (08)

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    (09)

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