Re: Models (why semantics?)

Sorry again. Now I think it is a 3x2 Tensor (Quads) matrix. And maybe it
could be 'aggregated' further into pairs of Definition / Declaration (see
doc I'm resubmitting).

Regards.
On Jun 20, 2017 4:08 PM, "Sebastian Samaruga" <ssamarug@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Sorry, I apologise again if I'm bothering someone with all this stuff.
>
> I know it's not gotten read a lot. But if someone does, I'm just looking
> forward for some feedback.
>
> I just try to explain the idea of RDF being the platform of (layers) of
> metamodels, each one addressing one of: identity alignment and merge,
> attribute and links discovery, and ordering / sorting of knowledge.
>
> All this leveraging the separation of concerns as regarded in the OOP
> design pattern: DCI (Data, Contexts, Interactions:
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data,_context_and_interaction) which,
> with the help of metamodel abstractions (Services) enables the possibility
> of a declarative style of programming (see attached document).
>
> Its funny that when I was developing the models I was struggled with the
> ways to encode RDF Quads components (CSPO identifiers) in a way compatible
> with Machine Learning representations such as those of Google TensorFlow.
> Well, it comes up that the metamodels I've developed forms a 3 by 3 matrix
> of 'quad tensors' (D, C, I by Schema, Rels, Order) being D, C, I instances
> of Schema, Rels and Order. If this is right maybe it should be easier to
> develop TF models wrapped around Nodes that should enable ML over this
> representations.
>
> My problem is the following: I can't mention Semantic Web (not even this
> project) with friends, colleagues, partners or whatever without getting
> shout off. And I really don't know if this list are the right place either.
> So, feel free to tell me whatever your opinions are or forward me to
> another lists.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Sebastián.
>