W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2003

RE: Proposed restatement of syntax-based interoperability princip le ( was RE: Action item on syntax-based interoperability)

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:17:08 -0600
Message-ID: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9EE1C@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>
To: 'Sandro Hawke' <sandro@w3.org>, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Cc: 'Olivier Fehr' <Olivier.Fehr@ofehr.com>, Bill de hOra <dehora@eircom.net>, www-tag@w3.org

Fine, Sandro; it just doesn't work for languages 
where behavioral fidelity is the key requirement, 
such as real-time 3D rendering systems for simulation 
and modeling or very large distributed 3D games. 

"Somewhere a bit must finally change state." C.F. Goldfarb

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Sandro Hawke [mailto:sandro@w3.org]

You can also standardize semantics (with our without a concrete
syntax) without talking about behavior, as is done for knowledge
representation languages like RDF.  Informally, the semantics allow
each party to make factual statements which others are free to act on
as they like.  This allows a kind of shared knowledge to emerge --
which I think counts as "interoperation" -- without any comment about
behavior.  (If we want to talk about which knowledge is really *true*
we may need to talk about the behavior of only stating true things,
but that's not part of the RDF specs.)
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2003 09:17:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:22 GMT