W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > January 2001

Re: Conceptual Graphs, N3, RDF, Semantic Web

From: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:32:33 -0500
Message-ID: <3A6E5AE1.45EE9A9B@oakland.edu>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
CC: fmanola@mitre.org, RDF Logic <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~

Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> 
> While I do indeed claim the right to declare
> the use of a word to local to myself or a message,
> in fact in this case I think my use is consistent
> with the use in the RDF community, and the RDF Model
> and Syntax Specification which, as a W3C Recommendation,
> has a certain following.  So the Community of Interpretation
> in this case is fairly large.

I was not being ironic when I said that this type of practice
is perfectly natural and understandable.  Even if a particular
instance of linguistic diversity or semantic/semiotic mutation
were not immediately understandable to me, personally, once it
becomes a persistent usage then there nothing to do but to try
to understand its dynamics, since persistent phenomena usually
have some sort of reason for being so.  Of course, this is the
ideal of scientific objectivity, which we fallible and mortal,
finite intuition creatures cannot achieve as often as we might
wish to do so.  Sometimes the desire to have communication be
easier than it is, when confronted with yet another disparity
or divergence of usage, instead of inspiring anthropological
interest, only incites that human, all too human reaction of
annoyance or irritation at being faced with yet another bit
of impediment to the goal that is so earnestly to be wished.

But these are just the phenomena, the likes or dislikes
of which it is supposed to be the job of inquiring and
reflective people to find practical ways to understand,
and then remedy them, as the case may be, if they can.

Oh, I use the word "local" in a mathematical sense,
where the interest is in finding ways to grasp the
relationship between local and global structure,
and not in the disparaging or minimizing sense.

> My tendency is to give respect to different incompatible
> communities of interpretation, of varying sizes, as I feel
> that the interaction of many different communities of many
> sizes is essential to society.

I agree.

I take it as my job to provide revealing analytic models
for the understanding of what goes on in such communities
and to design effective media and facilitating technologies
for the achievement (or the catalysis) of their optimal goals.

So mostly I end up trying to craft useful conceptual frameworks.
The types of local habitations and global settings that I have
been calling "sign relations" are just the most versatile of
the many types of frameworks that I have explored so far.
 
> These messages, though are specifically within
> the www-rdf-logic list which is a (relatively)
> well defined community.  It has a web address
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/
>
> which explicitly links it to
>
> http://www.w3.org/Metadata/
>
> and so to
>
> http://www.w3.org/RDF/
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/
>
> which defines RDF and says,
> 
> | In order to express this fact to RDF, we have to model
> | the original statement as a resource with four properties.
> | This process is formally called ~reification~ in the
> | Knowledge Representation community.  A model of
> | a statement is called a ~reified statement~.

Tim, I appreciate this bit of orientation -- I have been
perusing these pages in my scattered free times and will
be continuing to do so.   Naturally, in trying to learn
another new language one looks for points of comparison
with the grammars, the usages, and the vocabularies that
one already happens to know, and whenever I encounter an
apparent semantic disparity my strategy, once I get over
the shear fact of the discrepancy, is usually to seek out
the underlying historical continuities -- they are almost
always there to be found if one takes the trouble to look
for them, though, yes, sometimes it can be too much bother.

Thanks again,

Jon Awbrey

> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From:  "Jon Awbrey" <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
>   To:  "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
>   Cc:  <fmanola@mitre.org>; "RDF Logic" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
> Sent:  Thursday, January 18, 2001 12:48 AM
> Subj:  Re: Conceptual Graphs, N3, RDF, Semantic Web
> 
> > 才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you, Frank!
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From:  "Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>
> > > Sent:  Wednesday, January 17, 2001 5:45 PM
> > > Subj:  Re: Conceptual Graphs, N3, RDF, Semantic Web
> > >
> > > > I believe the definition of "reification" intended in the
> > > > context of RDF is along the lines of McCarthy's, found at
> > > >
> > > > http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/generality/node6.html
> > > > to wit:
> > > > [..]
> > > > This process of making objects out of sentences and other entities
> > > > is called reification.
> > >
> > > That ws indeed my sense,
> > > perhaps not the sense
> > > of some philosophers
> > > or psychologists,
> > > but this is the
> > > RDF logic list,
> > > and this is the
> > > sense in which
> > > RDF uses it.
> >
> > Tim,
> >
> > What you have just written is extremely instructive --
> > once I have found a fitting angle to reflect on it! --
> > you indicated yourself, by means of the index "my",
> > as being the possessor of the apt and proper sense
> > of the sign-spelt-string "reification" in question.
> > You asserted your right as a free interpretive agent
> > to use this hidebound and intellectually inert object
> > to say what you mean to say and to ploy it in the way
> > that you see fit.  By way of support for your daring
> > act of independence from the conventions and party
> > lines of others to create your own conventions and
> > to throw your own parties, you wisely adverted to
> > your local "community of interpretation" (COI),
> > which the actuality of your own person indexes,
> > and which, in turn, establishes the context of
> > your acts of meaning just what you mean within.
> > Was there a hint of insinuation or intimation that
> > this one: this community, this context, this sense,
> > is a cut above, or at least a cut apart, from the
> > many COI mistresses pursued by the other suitors?
> >
> > In doing all this, you do what is perfectly natural
> > and quite understandable, and I support with my life
> > and my sacred honor your right to do so -- and yet,
> > to be fair, I must do the same for every other one
> > who has the sense to use signs, or might some day,
> > some way.  And so how will I keep track of it all?
> > AI!  There's the rub!
> >
> > > (In N3, if
> > >
> > > :sky :color :blue  .
> > >
> > > is the "sentence", then
> > >
> > > { :sky :color :blue }
> > >
> > > is the "object".
> > >
> > > In the RDF model, this is represented by
> > > a set of sentences which describe it.)
> >
> > I am still at the beginning of trying to learn your language ...
> >
> > > I obviously have gone to the wrong
> > > cocktail parties, not having seen
> > > the word being used to impress
> > > the impressoinable ;-)
> >
> > Oh, I was just talking about a host
> > of other people that I once knew --
> > If the sloe gin don't fizz,
> > don't drink it ...
> >
> > Cheers, hic et nunc,
> >
> > Jon Awbrey
> >
> > 才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~
才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~
Received on Tuesday, 23 January 2001 23:32:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:38 GMT