W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > November 2010

Re: Model Semantics, Representation Syntax, and Systems Integration

From: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 15:57:59 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=rBOFEUjj5NTZ4=ncLWPqUg5=3t5nF55wkL9VB@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
<snip>
 I didn't understand, from reading the
> page, how it would help me in problems that I consider to require
> conceptual agreement, for example communicating among research groups
> mutant proteins that are hypothesized to be involved in causing
> disease, and evidence for those hypotheses.
</snip>
Alan:

I mis-read your post. I thought you referred to shared understanding
of the semantics of the data formats themselves, not the meaning of
the data in the payload itself.

My regrets for the errant post.

mca
http://amundsen.com/blog/
http://twitter.com@mamund
http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me


#RESTFest 2010
http://rest-fest.googlecode.com




On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 15:41, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> I assume we agree that mapping should be at the conceptual level while
>>> interchange formats remain negotiable. In a sense, the pursuit of a
>>> normative interchange format is inherently mercurial, but not so re.
>>> conceptual schema :-)
>> </snip>
>>
>> >From my POV, the principle of Hypermedia Factors[1] is one possible
>> way to define a conceptual agreement that is not bound to a single
>> media type or data format.
>>
>> [1] http://amundsen.com/hypermedia/hfactor/
>
> Can you explain what you mean by "conceptual agreement" and how
> hfactor can accomplish that? I didn't understand, from reading the
> page, how it would help me in problems that I consider to require
> conceptual agreement, for example communicating among research groups
> mutant proteins that are hypothesized to be involved in causing
> disease, and evidence for those hypotheses.
>
> -Alan
>
>>
>> mca
>> http://amundsen.com/blog/
>> http://twitter.com@mamund
>> http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me
>>
>>
>> #RESTFest 2010
>> http://rest-fest.googlecode.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 14:04, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/10/10 1:16 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Kingsley Idehen
>>> <kidehen@openlinksw.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Alan / John: maybe we could use this thread to arrive at obvious common
>>> ground re. data integration and the diminishing need for a syntax level
>>> lingua franca.
>>>
>>> Kingsley includes me presumably because of a response to an earlier
>>> message, not copied to this list.
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2010Nov/0322.html
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>>
>>> I think there *is* a need for a lingua franca for intercomputer
>>> communication. But I support the idea that there should be alternative
>>> syntaxes (as long as they can be clearly translated to the lingua
>>> franca).
>>>
>>> I assume we agree that mapping should be at the conceptual level while
>>> interchange formats remain negotiable. In a sense, the pursuit of a
>>> normative interchange format is inherently mercurial, but not so re.
>>> conceptual schema :-)
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Alan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Kingsley Idehen
>>> President&  CEO
>>> OpenLink Software
>>> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Kingsley Idehen
>>> President & CEO
>>> OpenLink Software
>>> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2010 20:58:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:21:06 UTC