# Re: Madonna / Data + Application Semantics

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 11:02:21 -0500
Message-Id: <d53fb2b4a888bd4e41c3edb35a4cb266@w3.org>

```

Le 09 févr. 2005, à 10:18, Henry Story a écrit :
> Logic, like most of mathematics is based on such simple and indubitable
> premisses, that trying to put them in doubt, especially for engineering
> reasons, would be like seeing a bridge builder doubt that mathematics
> was valid because his bridge fell apart.

The discussion is really interesting and strikes me always as in the
end what do you want of RDF and OWL. Or what wants to do with it?

Mathematics is not based on simple and indubitable premisses. It's a
bit more complicated than that. Mathematics has usually its own logics
inside mathematics, but get pretty dirty when used in the read world.
You can't solve certain equations for example, to find a solution,
there's a need for numerical calculations, and comes the world of

I have a physics background and the world is made of statistic, not
logical reasoning. :) Every assertion made are tied to a model (which
might change) and every assertion is an evaluation of factors, not a
yes or no. The world is fuzzy (it reminds me of the woody allen movie
where the main character complains is blur on the image, but he has
really became blur in life.)

The bridge builder might be right in the sense, maybe they don't use
the right mathematical models to build the bridge. Try to send a
satellite in space with Newtonian physics and only the mathematics
known at this time. :)))

For the notion of naming, I want to believe in fact even for an URI
pointing to something to describe a meaning, it's not a question of
unique absolute naming and then meaning. I want to believe in a range
of naming and interpretation, a social process.
Many people says this means that, then the statistical process, the
history, the circumstances give a particular meaning to it, only valid
for a certain period of time and in a certain context.
And we can imagine that it could be the same for semantic agents. The
interesting thing is what's happening when the semantics agents do not
agree with the humans, and they came with their own statistical
reasoning?

Futuro-Weird-Imagination: Another slighty related, can we do poetry
with RDF and OWL? In the sense can poetry (interpretation of senses,
games on meaning, evocation of beauty and pain, etc.) be created by/for
semantics agents.

PS: Maybe, I should try to diminish my rations of Camembert (cheese),
It's melting all over my mind. :)

--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
```
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 16:02:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:44 UTC