- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 00:59:39 +0100
- To: pfps@research.bell-labs.com
- Cc: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
[...] >> which can be proof checked >> the rdfs:comment remains opaque, we just have the reason > >In this case the social meaning is supposed to come from a natural langauge >rdfs:comment, so you can proof check back to the rdfs:comment. However, >this doesn't get you anywhere close to the social meaning. How are you >going to get there? > >Also, what if the social meaning comes from an XML comment? What if it >comes from something not on the web at all? well right, no answers, remember http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/0297.html [[[ The point is also that we cannot use a single notion of 'meaning' to say this properly, since of course the formal entailments cannot themselves utilize the social aspects of meaning which are included in *informal* aspects of the publication, such as in a comment which is opaque to any likely RDF inference engine or machine processor. Social meanings can be, as it were, transferred or carried by formal entailments, but they cannot be incorporated into the formal entailments. ]]] -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 19:00:23 UTC