|
On 1/8/13 5:11 PM, Ed Barkmeyer wrote:
On 1/8/2013 3:11 PM, Kingsley Idehen
wrote:
On 1/8/13 2:23 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
A datum is a role played by a proposition, as John Sowa said. A single
value is not a datum unless it represents a proposition.
Sure, but doesn't context determine role in this situation? Of course,
said determination might be implicit rather than explicit which is
ultimately inevitable. Thus, when _values_ are in the role of
representing the description of an observation subject, they denotation
"Data" applies. Likewise, if the aforementioned is achieved via a single
value, then the denotation "Datum" would apply.
I think this confuses John's assertion that a "datum" is a "role"
of a proposition. He takes the view that the proposition plays a
role in the assertion that it is true, and that role is called
"axiom" or "fact". I would just have said that a datum is a
proposition that is taken to be, or asserted to be, true. The
context for that role is any context in which the proposition is
taken to be true.
If the context of appearance of the datum is in a report, and you
trust the author of the report, then the datum/proposition is
taken to be true. That context has nothing to do with the subject
of the report, or the "subject" of the datum, or the the
spreadsheet it appears on, or anything the like. The context is
only the acceptance that the proposition is true.
The context of representation of a datum is "quite another thing
entirely". I agree that a "value" may be considered to represent
a datum, when the context of its appearance determines both the
relation to which it is (in most cases) an argument, and the
"subject", which is an/the other argument. So, in the context of
my driver's license, the "value" T labeled date-of-birth is
interpreted as the proposition (person.has.date-of-birth
EdBarkmeyer T), and that proposition is taken to be true. (Some
"values", such as "true" or "false" and "yes" or "no", are
representations of assertions involving unary predicates. For
example, the value "yes" in the blank following "US Citizen?" is
taken as a representation of the assertion (person.isUScitizen
EdBarkmeyer).)
So, in such a representation context, each value or tuple of
values is in the role of representing one proposition about the
subject. Assuming one respects the observer and takes these
propositions to be true, each proposition represents an
observation, and "data" is simply a set of observations. (I think
Kingsley's term "description of" means "set of observations
about".) That, unsurprisingly, pretty much coincides with the use
of the term "data" in science and statistics.
Yes, that's the basis of the definition I put forth.
Propositions (or data objects) are not restricted to triples (subject /
predicate / object, subject / verb / object, entity / attribute / value,
entity / key / value, ...). Some propositions naturally require higher
arity, e.g., X is 3 meters from Y.
Sure, but triples are an effective base upon which higher arity can be
built, right?
In a word, No. It is certainly possible to represent a
semantically ternary relation as a set of triples, but that is a
"form of _expression_". It is a transformation of the semantic
intent into a grammatical structure. I agree that the idea
"semantically ternary" may be dubious, since we are learning more
and more about the complex bi-directional relationship between
language and thought. But the point here is that a triples
language (we won't name any names) restricts the _expression_ of
intent in a way that requires circumlocution for some simple
semantic concepts. That is not at all the same idea as being a
"base on which higher arity [of intent] can be built".
Yes, I agree :-)
[SNIP]
--
Regards,
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
|
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)
|