Re: The semantics of rdfs:label

Dave Reynolds wrote :
> Any candidate common superproperty of *all* name properties will have to 
> apply to both instance data and concepts (...)

You are touching a very important point for me here.

   IMHO, there is a huge gap between the conceptual structures 
underlying the semantic Web and the final rendering of a user-interface 
enabling an end-user to peruse or act on part of it. These conceptual 
structures rely on both ontological (schema) and factual knowledge 
(instances). Interfaces have to be, at least partly, dynamically 
generated and rendered for every such structure coming in contact with 
the users.

   Even if the semantic web is a web augmented with formal knowledge to 
ease the automation of tasks carried out on the web, quite often in the 
use scenarios conceptual structures have to be (partially) made explicit 
in an interface, be it textual, graphical or voiced, etc.

   For me, this problem of automating the generation of representations 
for the conceptual structures (i.e. the notion of surrogates [1]) 
clearly calls for a richer model of the links between the conceptual 
structures and the semiotic level of the interfaces. I believe we need 
to be able to identify and differentiate between alternative signs and 
media channel, and link these semiotic alternatives and their logics to 
the underlying semantic structures and logics (including both the 
ontology and the instances).

   Looking even further, I believe there is a need to model the 
combination of a semantic level and a pragmatic level to produce 
representations at the semiotic level.

   My one cent.

Fab.

[1]http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/personnel/Fabien.Gandon/research/index.html#Gandon2005j

-- 
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
                                   -- Alan Kay.
  ____________
|__ _ |_  http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/personnel/Fabien.Gandon/
|  (_||_) INRIA Sophia Antipolis - ph# (33)(0)4 92 38 77 88

Received on Friday, 16 September 2005 11:44:57 UTC