W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sw-meaning@w3.org > October 2003

Re: [sw-meaning] Agenda & Logistics for Tomorrow's Telecon

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:25:09 -0500
Cc: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>, <public-sw-meaning@w3.org>
To: "John Black" <JohnBlack@deltek.com>
Message-Id: <CBBD4E86-0BBE-11D8-B55E-0003939E0B44@isr.umd.edu>

On Friday, October 31, 2003, at 09:35  AM, John Black wrote:

> I would like to propose to agree to use the term "connotation" to refer
> to those aspects of the semantics of URIs and SW languages that fall
> outside the model theory.

I object. I don't see that it clarifies anything to misuse a term.

> From
> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=connotation the definition of
> connotation includes:
> ...
> 2.a. An idea or meaning suggested by or associated with a word or 
> thing:
> ...
> 2.b. The set of associations implied by a word in addition to its 
> literal
> meaning.
> 3. Logic. The set of attributes constituting the meaning of a term;
> intension.
> I'm using the term in the sense of 2.a. and 2.b.

But you aren't. Since the meaning of a URI in an RDF document isn't, 
afaik, exhausted by its model theoretic meaning (er..which is an odd 
thing to say, but anyway).

> 5. Its shorter and more accurate than "social meaning".

In fact it isn't. My best reading of "social meaning" in this community 
*includes* connotation, but isn't exhausted by it.

And very important, concrete aspects of the meaning of a bit of RDF 
(i.e., how to connect what software does in reaction to consuming or 
processing some rdf with the meaning of that rdf) fall outside the 
usual sense of "connotation".


Bijan Parsia.
Received on Friday, 31 October 2003 11:26:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:56:01 UTC