[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] The class of the planet Venus

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:53:55 -0400
Message-id: <50008AE3.1020103@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 7/13/12 4:34 PM, Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> Ed,
>> How about this, with a little more clarity on my side:
>> Sign -- URI that denotes an entity/thing .
>> Sense -- Web Document *Content* that describes URI referent e.g., via 
>structured content that takes the form of an entity-attribue-value graph where 
>each attribute=value pair coalesces around a Subject URI .
>> Reference -- Description Subject or URI Referent.
>> Thus, when using the World Wide Web from my computing device (desktop,
>> notebook, tablet, or phone) I can de-reference a URI and then use my
>> screen to sense what said URI denotes.
> Yes.  The (semantic) *Content* of the Resource/Document is the Sense.
> (BTW, the English term "Sense" has meanings that no German would impute
> to Frege's "Sinn".  Sinn is about understanding, about 'making sense'.
> It is the opposite of Unsinn = Nonsense.  It has nothing to do with the
> 5 'senses' and what they do, which in German is called 'spueren'.
> (English 'spoor' has the same root.) So what you do with your screen is
> to 'obtain the Sense' of the URI, by using perception and interpretation
> skills on the presented Document.)
> I have argued with the SBVR folk and some RDF folk that 'structured
> content' and a 'structure of meaning' are terms for Sense when they
> refer to the notional intent that is built up piecewise from more
> elementary intent.   That is, there is no difference in kind between the
> 'structural content' of an English sentence and the 'structural content'
> of an RDF graph, although they involve different structures.  They are
> both just ways of constructing a complex meaning from simpler meanings.
> The English sentence as sound or text, and any exchange form of the RDF
> graph, are expressions in languages that convey the intended meaning by
> representing those structures.  The idea that in humans the nature of
> meaning is really different from the structure of meaning created from
> the language is a matter of hot debate, but it is irrelevant to
> knowledge engineering -- we can only deal with meaning developed from
> structure.
> -Ed    (01)

Great! It's a wrap then :-)    (02)

--     (03)

Regards,    (04)

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen    (05)

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

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    (01)

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