Re: Definition of Normative

> From my perspective, the answer to your question is yes.
>
you mean, I am being too pedantic? I think so too but..
ten years ago, or so, I would have searched for, say, definition of HOR
that was a quick thing, search for definitions on google would result in
key resources popping up
and listed the various sources/definitions and if none would satisfy
my  requirement/worldview, I would then create a new one, which would come
up
in searches

But things dont work like that anymore, at least not for me
to search for a term definition on google now requires massive knowledge
of the subject, knowledge of what resources are reliable- let alone
normative -
then look for such resources, plus searching papers for definitions that
dont come in searches etc

To be thorough takes time
I am not debating, I am asking if anyone has a definition that I can
reference. and if not, should we come up with one.

I dont complain when I dont get a straight answer because
there is no straight answer :-)

PDM

> 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>
> 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>
>> 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>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>