- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 20:41:23 +0200
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Friday, October 8, 2004, 8:31:38 PM, noah wrote: nuic> Mostly looks good. At the very end of the section on noise, redundancy nuic> and information theory I think I made a comment that the scribe missed. If nuic> there's no dissent, I'd like it recorded: nuic> After the existing entry: nuic> Chris: redundancy helps succesful conveyance of information accurately. nuic> Hence the need for surrounding context when using a URI to transfer nuic> information nuic> Noah: nuic> True, but I wanted to clarify that I wasn't referring to lossy channels or nuic> redundancy when I suggested that information theory could help us. Though nuic> I'm not expert in Info. Theory, my understanding is that it gives a nuic> definition of "pure information" (my term, not Shannon's--I don't have his nuic> writing here=) that is essentially what you are TRYING to communicate nuic> through the channel. So, by analogy, we need not have redundancy in a nuic> temperature value or the words in a poem to say that they are nuic> "information". We may need redundancy to communicate them with some nuic> predictable probability of success through a noisy channel. HTTP needs nuic> redundancy on the wire, the info resource definition as information does nuic> not involve redundancy IMO. nuic> I've elaborated a bit but I think this was the spirit of my comment. Might nuic> this be added to the official minutes? Thank you! I recall you saying things along these lines and have no objection to that passage being added to the minutes. It seemed like useful clarification between information-per-se and the transmission of information. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Friday, 8 October 2004 18:41:24 UTC