Good points, Doug and David. I would add that in addition to the fact that context and differing perspectives on a given context by participating “agents” affect the interpretation of these mental constructs, institutional and operational contexts and assumed scope boundaries associated with those contexts affect the interpretation by participating agents as well. Much of the “dark web” exists inside specific institutional domains (i.e. “intranets”), and much discourse on the open internet also makes specific institutional context and scope assumptions (e.g., relevant language, naming conventions, postal codes, addresses, currencies, etc.). Unfortunately, we humans are good at “sensing” such contexts implicitly, and find it cumbersome to be explicit about such contexts and scope assumptions – until they bite us. Hans From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Eddy
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 1:48 PM
To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx; [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontologies vs. Web Ontologies Doug - On Oct 24, 2012, at 12:39 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
Nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, etc. are mental constructs,
parts of languages. They may refer to things in the physical world (or not)
but they are not part of the physical world. AND—surprise, surprise—such constructs do NOT have to be used "correctly." (Whatever "correctly" means.) I will not even bother commenting on the "universality" of such constructs. ____________________________ |