Re: Definition of Normative

 From my perspective, the answer to your question is yes.

I use Wikipedia all the time and find it highly useful.

Norms cross the line when some come to believe they have the right to 
impose them by force upon others.

In any event, it seems to me that we waste far too much time debating 
the meaning of terms while failing to pursue the achievement of results 
upon which we may already agree... and then wondering why we don't seem 
to be accomplishing much.

Owen

On 3/27/2020 10:21 PM, Paola Di Maio wrote:
> Thank you Owen
>
> Yes, I know of the many definitions of normative
>
> thanks for the pointer to de facto (although I do not use wikipedia as 
> a source)
> what about ''normative definition''?
>
> we may have to define the expression
> what is a normative definition
>
> am I being too pedantic?
> PDM
>
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 10:09 AM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net 
> <mailto:Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>> wrote:
>
>     Here's Wikipedia's description of the meaning of "normative" in
>     the standards development space:
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative#Standards_documents
>
>     It seems to me that the relevant distinction is /de jure/ versus
>     /de facto. /https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_jure v.
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto
>
>     /De facto/ trumps /de jure/ in most, if not necessarily all cases,
>     at least in the "free" world -- where "voluntary consensus
>     standards" are the norm.
>
>     Wikipedia redirects a "voluntary consensus standard" query to this
>     reference <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization>, wherein
>     four levels and four techniques of standardization are referenced:
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization#Process
>
>     The aim of the StratML standard is to /enable/ individuals and
>     organizations to work more efficiently and effectively together in
>     pursuit of common and complementary objectives.  To suggest that
>     they be forced to do so, seems like a contradiction in terms... or
>     at least to invite counterproductive resistance.
>
>     Owen
>
>     On 3/27/2020 9:40 PM, Paola Di Maio wrote:
>>     Thanks Carl
>>     glad you think so
>>
>>     normative as in....
>>     because things are changing all the time//
>>
>>     actually, could not find a definition of 'normative definition'
>>
>>     is there a source
>>
>>     we dont really have a global jurisdiction byt w3c is global
>>     can we assume that we aim to do here is normative
>>     shall we call upon authors who have used HOR in their papers
>>     and invite them to collaborate on a normative definition?
>>
>>     pointers to a process to deliver a normative definition?
>>
>>
>>     P
>>
>>     On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 7:43 PM carl mattocks
>>     <carlmattocks@gmail.com <mailto:carlmattocks@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Yes. A normative definition for HOR would be very useful
>>
>>         Carl
>>
>>         On Thu, Mar 26, 2020, 11:28 PM Paola Di Maio
>>         <paola.dimaio@gmail.com <mailto:paola.dimaio@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             I need to reference formally the following concepts and
>>             have not found a good enough source
>>
>>             *Harms* of allocation refers to unfairly assigned
>>             opportunities or resources due to algorithmic intervention.
>>             *Harms of representation* refers to algorithmically
>>             filtered depictions that are discriminatory.
>>
>>             https://machinesgonewrong.com/bias_i/
>>
>>             I wonder if:
>>             we should aim to include these definitions in our work
>>             are there other types of harm not included in this
>>             classification
>>             does someone know of a suitable citation/source other
>>             thank this web page which is great
>>             we should reference harm in our work where relevant
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>             PDM
>>