- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:06:20 -0500
- To: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Elliotte Harold writes: > There's the hint of a valid principle here, but I think it needs to be > fleshed out more and not grounded in the notion of understanding. Fair enough. I think many of your comments are on the mark, or at least close to it. My real interest in getting this version out is mostly to have a placeholder that will be useful in deciding whether we want to open an issue, and if so, with what scope. I don't consider it to be either very carefully worded or carefully reasoned at this point. Mostly, my intention is to indicate the rough outline of a finding that might eventually be useful. As to the notion of understanding: I think it does play a role, though I think you're right that the current text probably goes too far in implying that such understanding is an all or nothing business, when in many interesting cases it's a matter of degree. Indeed, particularly on the Web, we benefit from agents like crawlers many of which are built specifically to do useful work based on a partial or even in part incorrect "understanding" of the documents they retrieve. Overall, it's not my intention to take this toward a very formal notion of information transfer or understanding, but rather to try and explain at a commonsense level why certain forms of Web content may be more useful, for certain purposes, than other forms. Thanks an any case for the quick response. Noah -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 26 February 2007 14:06:40 UTC