W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2004

RE: "information resource"

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:24:23 -0500
Message-ID: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206718@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>
To: 'Stuart Williams' <skw@hp.com>
Cc: 'Jon Hanna' <jon@hackcraft.net>, 'Chris Lilley' <chris@w3.org>, 'Jacek Kopecky' <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>, www-tag@w3.org

That was a thumbs up.  It notes that the colloquial term 
within the scope of the architecture has a testable meaning 
and that is the same as the test for 'information resource': 
it returns a representation.

Right? Or am I confused too?

I think of it in the traditional sense of "ontological 
commitment" per Thomas Gruber.

"An ontology should require the minimal ontological 
commitment sufficient to support the intended knowledge 
sharing activities... Since ontological commitment is based 
on consistent use of vocabulary, ontological commitment can 
be minimized by specifying the weakest theory (allowing 
the most models) and defining only those terms which are 
essential to the communication of knowledge consistent 
with that theory."


From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
Stuart Williams

So Len... that's a thumbs down on the colloquailism?

Or maybe you wanted to confuse... :-) and maybe in my case succeeded :-)
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 17:24:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:43 UTC