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

Re: Nunciation

From: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 16:32:01 -0500
Message-ID: <3A748FD1.232A5608@oakland.edu>
To: Arisbe <arisbe@stderr.org>, RDF Logic <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>, SemioCom <semiocom@listbot.com>, Stand Up Ontology <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
CC: Robert Meersman <Robert.Meersman@vub.ac.be>, Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>, Matthew West <Matthew.R.West@is.shell.com>
才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~

Arisbeans, RDF Lodgers, SemioComrades, Stand Up Ontologists,

I have a sense that the recent questions of Seth Russell and Robert Meersman
are pointing to a deeper lying qualm about the nature of our discussion here,
that -- behind, beneath, and beyond the points of a "comment on style" (COS)
that affect nothing more worthy of note than the character of one individual
author-ship's peculiar writing affectations -- putting that aside, they cast
to the fore a complex assortment of issues on which this group has long been
divided into a host of different camps, to wit, the polyphemic protean topic
that I will try, this time out, to express in terms of the following queries:

| Why is it necessary to reflect on signs?
| Why not just talk about the objects alone?
| Why not just use signs without mentioning them?

But I have deadline on another paper,
and so I leave it as an exercise for
the reader, and will return later on
to see what solution ye hath wrought.

Until Then,

Jon Awbrey

才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~才~~~~~~~~
Received on Sunday, 28 January 2001 16:32:35 GMT

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