- From: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 14:48:05 -0500
- To: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>, Matthew West <Matthew.R.West@is.shell.com>
- CC: Stand Up Ontology <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>, SemioCom <semiocom@listbot.com>, RDF Logic <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>, Arisbe <arisbe@stderr.org>
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Seth Russell wrote:
>
> Jon Awbrey wrote:
>
> > | "Matthew" is a sign that denotes Matthew (in the real world).
> > | "x" is a sign that denotes x (in the real world).
> > | "<x, y>" is a sign that denotes <x, y> (in the real world).
> > | "R" is a sign that denotes {<x, y> : <x, y> in R} (ITRW).
> > | '"Matthew"' is a sign that denotes "Matthew" (in the real world).
> > | '"x"' is a sign that denotes "x" (in the real world).
> > | '"<x, y>"' is a sign that denotes "<x, y>" (in the real world).
> > | '"R"' is a sign that denotes "R" (in the real world). <<<---<<<
>
> So can you provide a dereferencible URI to ITRW,
> and will you assert (in the real world) that it
> is the official URI ?
>
> <swag:signature
> language="N3"
> context="swag:ThisEmail"
> tallingIn="http://swag.semanticweb.org/termsplayground/#"
> intent=":FYI">
> :Seth
> :properName "Seth Russell";
> :mbox "mailto:seth@robustai.net";
> :workingOn <http://RobustAI.net/MyNetwork/index.html>;
> :workingOn <http://robustAI.net/MyNetwork/StickeyCyberMolecules.html>;
> :wrote <http://robustai.net/ai/symknow.htm>;
> :conjectures <http://RobustAi.net/Ai/Conjecture.htm>;
> :affiliatedWith <http://purl.org/swag/>;
> :affiliatedWith <http://speaktomecatalog.com>;
> :lookingFor [Who:Person#x :willProgram :Sembrowser].
> </swag:signature>
>
> [:Seth :notes "the syntax error encountered when using
> the N3 "<...>" construct when embedded in XML."]
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
| A Question!?
| Since before your sun ...
| [atmospheric, html, static, unreadable] ...
| I have waited for a Question!?
Now, Seth, you know perfectly well, before you even speak,
that any brands of tokens of signs, that I might arrange
to be transmitted from my keyboard and on to your screen,
could never be more than ever-more interrupretive tokens
of "yet another sign, yet another text" (YASYAT), & even
if I were to e-range them to be so "blue of face" (BOF)
that you could e-mediately clique on them, then all you
would view as the upshot of that co-imputation would be
yet another e-rangement of more or less significant bits,
however iconic, indexical, symbolic they might be to you,
their e-mediate interpreter.
So, since we both know that all we will be seeing appear,
on our respective neighborhood screens, is more and more
signs -- as objectively physical as they are in their way,
it is only, or primarily, in their leading roles as signs
that we value them, is it not? -- so, if I call to your
mind in some fashion Our Own Lord Clyde, you will not be
expecting me to manifest before your eyes, anytime soon,
the full-fleshed element of his class, in the full glory
of His Aweful Presence, not by e-mail, nor on the backs
of myriads of myrmidons of e-scargot, nor by any other
manner of hyper-motic gesture, no matter what the arts
of my prestidigitation at the keyboard may conjure up.
So, even if I share with you a striking image, like so:
http://math.gc.cuny.edu/Logic/MAMLS/
An image that so startled me, as if in response to some deeply hidden,
innate instinctual terror that rose within my ape-extracted essence
when first I happened to encounter it, just as if I had suddenly
stumbled on the aboding place of the beasts themselves, that
I quite literally gödelly jumped!
No, even in view of all that -- no, e-specially in view of all that! --
neither you nor I will expect so gullibly, at least, not with a bit
of reflection -- to see the object of all of these signi-depictions,
signi-dications, signi-fications, signi-vacations, and just plain
signs to quite so quickly find itself magically syn-tacked to
our web-wide-walls.
So, just what 'is' the relation of all of these conceivable signs,
but signs still possessed of a purely potential significance,
to that which we call "TRW"? -- no, not this TRW:
http://www.trw.com/
Now, you are just being silly!
Well, that is an addressee that will take a bit longer to address.
Until Then,
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Received on Saturday, 27 January 2001 14:47:57 UTC