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

my context

From: Richard H. McCullough <rhm@cdepot.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 22:12:04 -0800
Message-ID: <000a01c295db$e8ee8f40$bd7ba8c0@rhm8200>
To: "RDF-Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Cc: "William Thomas" <wthomas@nycap.rr.com>, "Richard S. Latimer" <latimer1@att.net>
# KEHOME/knowledge/theory/Epistemology/MyContext.txt
# Nov/26/2002

#============#
# My Context #
#============#

Suppose I make the statement

    I saw Bob Hope in person at the Presidio.

What is the context of my statement?  Quite literally,
it is everything I know.

    at space=here, time=now, view=Dick McCullough knows {
        I saw Bob Hope in person at the Presidio
    }

How can you understand what I said?
Because your context is everything you know,
and our contexts have a lot in common.

    at space=there, time=now, view=you know {
        Dick McCullough saw Bob Hope in person at the Presidio
    }

Note:
For this example, I'm leaving out the extra layer of context

    at view=Dick McCullough says { ... }


From the viewpoint of knowledge representation, capturing
everything I know is a difficult problem.  What can we do
to simplify that problem?  I see two promising approaches.

1. We can use genus-differentia definitions to condense the
knowledge.

    at view=Dick McCullough definitions { ... }

2. We can select only those definitions that are relevant to
the words in my statement.

    at view=relevant Dick McCullough definitions { ... }

In theory, these are common-sense, reasonable approaches;
in practice, they need to be tested.
============ 
Dick McCullough 
knowledge := man do identify od existent done
knowledge haspart list of proposition
Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2002 01:12:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:57 GMT