Re: Options we have with respect to the draft charters (i.e., RE: [fwd] Draft charters for work on Semantics for WS) from Drew McDermott on 2005-11-21 (public-sws-ig@w3.org from November 2005)

From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:52:47 -0500
To: public-sws-ig@w3.org
CC: drew.mcdermott@yale.edu
Message-ID: <17281.60751.734669.176151@DVM-Powerbook.local>

> [jeff@inf.ed.ac.uk]
> 
> BTW, why is it said that "the current WSDL standard operates at the
> syntactic level"?  What is any more semantic about the things that
> are labelled "semantic"?

By old and well established usage, "semantic" means "complex,
expressive, insightful, ours," contrasted with "syntactic," which
means "simple, weak, error-prone, theirs."

It would be nice to avoid this term completely, but then we'd have to
change the name "Semantic Web."

                                             -- Drew

Received on Monday, 21 November 2005 15:51:41 UTC