consensus and consistency from Dan Connolly on 2003-10-10 (public-sw-meaning@w3.org from October 2003)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 11:25:19 -0500
To: public-sw-meaning@w3.org
Message-Id: <1065803119.13827.1716.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

/me q+ to suggest that consensus is valuable almost intrinsically, and
to note that even informally specified ontologies are useful in order to
encourage people to use terms in consensus (related to, but less formal,
than consistency) with lots of other people. Let us look at formally
specified ontologies as a specialization that allows us to delegate
certain computations (such as consistency) to the machine.

I guess I'll mail it rather than (a) interrupting the
conversation or (b) losing the thought.

q+ in the sense of
http://www.w3.org/2002/03/RRSAgent

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Friday, 10 October 2003 12:25:20 UTC