> > particular confusion is so destructive. Unlike the dogs-vs-bitches case, > the difference between the document and its topic, the thing, is that one is > ABOUT the other. This is not simply a matter of ignoring some Could it be exactly the other way around? that documents and things described in it are easy to distinguis EXACTLY becouse one is about the other, no one can possibly mess them up/except for idiotic computer algorithms from the 70s that limits themselves to simbolic AI techniques. Otherwise you seem to say that its more difficult to distinguish between a dog and a bitch than it is to distinguish between a dog and a stream of bytes in return to an HTTP request, and that seems a bit funny? look if someone points me at a facebook URL i know its about a person and not about the damn page (which has 2000 ways to change every time that url is resolved anyway. > certainly breaks **semantic** architecture. It completely destroys any > semantic coherence we might, in some perhaps impossibly optimistic vision of > the future, manage to create within the semantic web. So yes indeed, the Web > will go on happily confusing things with documents, partly because the Web > really has no actual contact with things at all: it is entirely constructed > from documents (in a wide sense). But the SEMANTIC Web will wither and die, > or perhaps be still-born, if it cannot find some way to keep use and mention > separate and coherent. i mean we can go on and tell oursellf we cant possibly write applications that know or understand what facebook URL is about. but dont be surprised as less and less people will be willing to listen as more and more applications (Eg.. all the stuff based on schema.org) pop up never knowing there was this problem... (not in general. of course there is in general, but for their specific use cases) Gio
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2011 16:28:48 UTC