W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 2002

Re: context

From: Richard H. McCullough <rhm@cdepot.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 20:20:48 -0800
Message-ID: <000e01c2a4ba$836a76a0$bd7ba8c0@rhm8200>
To: <seth@mail.robustai.net>, "RDF-Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Re my "diary" scenario
re 2) I am the agent.  I do the collection.
re 3) Your "thing" corresponds to my "purpose" (which I didn't mention on-list).

It seems to me that the primary difference  between our scenarios is
-- you're emphasizing the collection process, and apparently thinking of collecting very specific info. from the internet
-- I'm emphasizing the context-proposition relation, and thinking of collecting general info. from anywhere
Dick McCullough 
knowledge := man do identify od existent done
knowledge haspart proposition list

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Seth Russell 
  To: RDF-Interest ; Richard H. McCullough 
  Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 2:13 PM
  Subject: Re: context

  Your notion of context seems to me to be the catch-all context node ... like rdfs:Resourse, it is a class of contexts in which all collections of propositions fall (or at least all that were collected by you in your diary).  I think such a notion of context is just about as useful as the notion of the class of all classes; it is more just the background of any particular proposition.  To me context is more specific.  It is, as you have defined, a collection of propositions.  But more specifically it is all the propositions which have been collected by some agent or agents for ?x (or about ?x,or in the process of doing ?x, or any other intentional activity twards ?x).  The ?x in the previous sentence can be any thing. The propositions in that collection are the associated context for that agent (or agents) for that thing.  So all of the collections of propositions in my notion of context would be subContext(s) of your notion of Context.  

  So my notion of context is the association of the following:

  1) a collection of statements with their provanance
  2) an agent or agents that collect (1)
  3) a thing that the collecting of (1) is about

  Your notion only mentions (1) and does not deal with (2) or (3). 

  What do you think?

  Seth Russell 

  Incidentally I have another week or so of work in the salt mines of 
  http://speaktomecatalog.com/ so it may be a while before 
  I can defend my opinion here.

  ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
  From: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@cdepot.net>
  Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:13:00 -0800

  >Here's my most fundamental view of context.
  >Imagine that I decide to record all my knowledge in a diary.  Every day, I write propositions in my diary, numbering them 1, 2, ....
  >Today, I record proposition 123456789; the context of proposition 123456789 is the list of propositions from 1 to 123456788.
  >It's that simple!
  >My KR language and KE program is my way of recording, organizing & using a large list of propositions.
  >Dick McCullough 
  >knowledge := man do identify od existent done
  >knowledge haspart proposition list
Received on Sunday, 15 December 2002 23:20:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:43 UTC