- From: <Svgdeveloper@aol.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 06:37:24 EDT
- To: www-style@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org, kynn@idyllmtn.com
I wrote: >>It seems to me that we need to be clearer about terminology since >>two, seemingly intelligent, individuals interpret the semantic >>richness and poverty of XML in two diametrically opposed ways. >>Andrew Watt Kynn wrote: >Terminology is pretty simple. Semantics equals "meaning." Kynn, I suggest you consider the possibility that semantics is a multi-dimensional concept with many subtleties. Not in the least "simple". My post at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Aug/0266.html lists seven possible aspects/dimensions of semantics. By suggesting an equality between "semantics" and "meaning" that "simply" shifts the analysis to attempting to determine what "meaning" means. Care to offer a definition? :) ... That too is not simple and could necessitate bringing in additional issues of social and political determinants of meaning/semantics (or the interpretation of them) that are far from simple. Regards Andrew Watt
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2002 06:37:58 UTC