- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 10:32:31 +0000
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: public-sw-meaning@w3.org
At 10:15 06/11/03 -0600, pat hayes wrote: >In passing, I would like to avoid this terminology where we talk about >*kinds* of meanings, if we can possibly manage to do so. It suggests a >kind of botanical classification of meaning-species, and this tends to >encourage a kind of Balkanization which we already have a tendency to fall >into, where each of us with various agendas feels compelled to protect the >rights of one kind of meaning over the other upstarts. Maybe this is >unavoidable, but we should try to avoid it as far as possible. I am >convinced that these different 'kinds' of meaning are all aspects of one >notion, and that we should be able to find a way to make that clear. Blind >men and the elephant, you know the story. Hmmm... I feel there is a qualitative distinction between that which can be deduced by formal means, and statements that are consensually acknowledged as truths by a community of people. I'm entirely content that these should not be seen as "different kinds of meaning", but I think we need some way to talk about the distinctions and boundaries and interactions between them. If we can somehow glimpse the whole elephant, I think that would help. #g ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Friday, 7 November 2003 05:33:58 UTC