W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > January 2003

Re: issues to be resolved before last call (rdfms-assertion)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 19:12:52 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030121.191252.27016275.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: jos.deroo@agfa.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Subject: Re: issues to be resolved before last call (rdfms-assertion)
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:59:39 +0100

> [...]
> >> which can be proof checked
> >> the rdfs:comment remains opaque, we just have the reason
> >
> >In this case the social meaning is supposed to come from a natural langauge
> >rdfs:comment, so you can proof check back to the rdfs:comment.  However,
> >this doesn't get you anywhere close to the social meaning.  How are you
> >going to get there?
> >
> >Also, what if the social meaning comes from an XML comment?  What if it
> >comes from something not on the web at all?
> well right, no answers, remember
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/0297.html
> [[[
> The point is also that we cannot use a single notion of
> 'meaning' to say this properly, since of course the formal
> entailments cannot themselves utilize the social aspects
> of meaning which are included in *informal* aspects of the
> publication, such as in a comment which is opaque to any
> likely RDF inference engine or machine processor. Social
> meanings can be, as it were, transferred or carried by
> formal entailments, but they cannot be incorporated into
> the formal entailments.
> ]]]
> -- ,
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

So, in other words, social meaning cannot even be proof checked, not even
just to the point of getting to a natural language string that might carry
the social meaning.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research
Lucent Technologies
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 19:13:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:50 UTC