Re: Framework Report (28 Apr 09)

Hi Paola,

Thanks for doing that section on interop gaps. I noticed the following
definitions:

------------------------------
The syntactic gap in communication is caused by different language
schema notation, where the schemas are not compatible. This gap is
generally bridged by 'mapping' elements of a schema to another
syntactic representation.

The semantic gap characterizes the difference between two descriptions
of an object by different linguistic representations, for instance
languages or symbols. In computer science, the concept is relevant
whenever ordinary human activities, observations, and tasks are
transferred into a computational representation.

The pragmatic gap results from the difference in organisational and
social context of the communication layer, which contributes to
different operational and information models, and therefore can be
viewed as the result of the combinatorial explosion of the 'context'
to knowledge on the web. Pragmatically challenges to knowledge reuse,
and relevant contextual dependencies, are considered not merely
technical, but belong to the realm of social and organisational
systems design and management, and extend well into the boundaries of
what is designated as 'policy' management.
-----------------------------

Do these definitions cover the gap between in systems and interop
standards to match a needed use-case? I think that need to be
clarified a bit more if possible in this model.



chamindra de silva
http://chamindra.googlepages.com



On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au> wrote:
> The HTML version is now up:
>
>  <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/XGR-Framework-20090428/>
>
> or
>
>  <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/XGR-framework/>
>
>
> Cheers...  Renato Iannella
> NICTA
>
>
>
>

Received on Monday, 4 May 2009 02:33:38 UTC