- 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