Re: No Standard Semantic Web Pragmatics?

At 18:17 -0400 6/10/04, John Black wrote:
>So here is what it looks like to me.
>
>A general purpose communication system, where:
>
>There is no standard way to tell who is making statements.
>
>There is no standard way to tell whether whoever is doing it is
>asserting, denying, quoting, or just experimenting with those
>statements.
>
>Its a new, artificial language but there is no standard way for
>fixing or learning the intended interpretation of its terms, URIrefs.
>
>URIrefs, most of which look just like URLs, are to be treated as
>strings bearing no standard relation to the URLs they look
>like, or to anything that might be done with them on the web.
>
>You can reason over it, but everything stated is considered true,
>and there is no standard way for anything to be unsaid.
>
>And the people that would need to be involved to develop some
>plain old-fashioned standard language pragmatics[1,2] are either
>firmly against it or are too busy out writing code with it to
>bother.
>
>Do I understand this correctly?
>
>
>[1] The Semantics-Pragmatics Distinction
>http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~kbach/semprag.html
>[2] Pragmatics of the Semantic Web
>http://semanticweb2002.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/proceedings/Position/kim.pdf
>


Yup, I think you got it -- just like the real world!
-- 
Professor James Hendler			  http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-277-3388 (Cell)

Received on Thursday, 10 June 2004 18:24:35 UTC