On 1/9/13 4:42 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
> On Tue, January 8, 2013 15:11, 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?
> It can. Different parts of the proposition can be encoded in different ways
> and may have to be collected from different "locations" to assemble the
> proposition.
>
>> Of course, said determination might be implicit
>> rather than explicit which is ultimately inevitable.
> Yes. Which makes it dangerous for various parts of a proposition,
> e.g., triples, to be collected across the semantic web divorced from the
> context which gives them meaning.
>
>> Thus, when _values_ are in the role of
>> representing the description of an observation subject, they denotation
>> "Data" applies.
> The denotation applies if they are in their context. A table of numeric
> values that was extracted from some data set, is not data if it is presented
> raw, lacking its context.
>
>> Likewise, if the aforementioned is achieved via a single
>> value, then the denotation "Datum" would apply.
> Yes, so long as it is connected with its context.
>
>>> 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 some cases this is more difficult to do than others in a semantically
> meaningful way. One could use a LISP philosophy to make any higher-
> arity relation into a set of triples by defining the third argument to be
> a list, and CDRing down the list -- but attributing semantics to the
> progressively smaller lists might not be fruitful.
>
> One way of using triples to express the distance between two objects would
> be to reify the pair of objects and use:
> (distanceBetweenObjectPair ObjectPairXY (Meters 3))
> having defined ObjectPairXY as an ObjectPair with exactly two members,
> the distinct things X and Y:
> (ObjectPair ObjectPairXY)
> (member X ObjectPairXY)
> (member Y ObjectPairXY)
>
>>> Propositions represented by subject -
>>> predicate - direct object - indirect object in English (Juan gave Xue
>>> the book) can be modeled by reifying the action and conjoining multiple
>>> ternary propositions, but a single higher-arity proposition can be
>>> useful for many purposes.
>> Sure, but you always need a building point that provides foundation (be
>> permanent or temporary).
> I note that databases traditionally encode high arity relations. Very often
> a single column does not relate the value in that column for a row to the
> thing represented by the key of the row. It takes multiple columns to do
> so.
>
> Both the high-arity relation and the data base provide foundations for such
> propositions. Arbitrarily restricting a formalism to triples complicates
> matters without providing any benefit (except to those wedded to the
> triple formalism).
>
> I find arguments for basing semantics on triples to be similar to arguments
> for basing arithmetic computations on Peano arithmetic, due to its
> providing a foundation for arithmetic. A system based on Peano arithmetic
> has no need for a system to encode addition, subtraction, or multiplication,
> or their associated tables. Sure, all that can be derived, but the
> efficiency
> leaves something to be desired, and the clarity of operations (reasoning)
> is hidden. I find that the same holds for restricting the encoding of
> semantics
> to triples.
>
> -- doug f (01)
Okay, not in disagreement with you per se. Especially where you make
note of "efficiency" as a factor re. derivation benefits etc.. (02)
Thanks for the clarifications. (03)
Kingsley
>
>> Kingsley
>>> -- doug
>>>
>>> On Tue, January 8, 2013 08:13, John F Sowa wrote:
>>>> ... The word 'proposition', for example,
>>>> is more fundamental than the words 'assertion', 'statement',
>>>> 'judgment',
>>>> 'assumption', 'belief', 'hypothesis', 'axiom', or 'theorem'.
>>>> Therefore,
>>>> it is reasonable to say that Proposition is the natural type, and the
>>>> other words describe roles that a proposition can play.
>>>> The words 'datum' and 'data' most definitely describe roles.
>>> On Mon, January 7, 2013 19:29, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>>> On 7 January 2013 23:25, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/7/13 5:04 PM, Gary Berg-Cross wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> "data object" is much clearer [1] i.e., a resource comprised of
>>>>> structured
>>>>> data. Typical representation, for a given perception medium (e.g., the
>>>>> World Wide Web or paper) is a subject->predicate->object,
>>>>> subject->verb->object, entity->attribute->value style of graph
>>>>> pictorial
>>>>> :-)
>>>> I used to talk to people about "predicate / object" and mainly would
>>>> get
>>>> blank stares.
>>>> I tried "attribute / value" which seemed to have *slightly* more
>>>> understanding.
>>>> I'm adding to my terminology to term "key / value pairs" which I think
>>>> may
>>>> be effective to some audiences
>>>>> Links:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. http://bit.ly/PnTJdV -- understanding data objects .
>>>>>
>>>>> Kingsley
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary Berg-Cross, Ph.D.
>>>>> gbergcross@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?GaryBergCross
>>>>> Potomac, MD
>>>>> 240-426-0770
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> (04)
-- (05)
Regards, (06)
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 (07)
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)
|