RE: Schemata are not just constraints [was: "RDF + Topic Maps" = TheFutu
Asking too much is part of getting a good deal. Write an ontology for buying a used car. :-) It means what you predict. Ontologies are self-fulfilling internally (consistent) and predictable when used to service multiple parties (coherent). Dictionary + Tests. Services are tested. The axioms can be behavioral. We probably should do a little more work understanding the original author's meaning for the "knowledge level". It seems however, that the arbiter of commitment is test results per an interpreted description. That corresponds reasonably well to how contracts that depend on standard references are negotiated. Perhaps defining tests appears to be outside the mission of RDF or Topic maps, but I think it is just another ontology and set of resources. We may need an ontology to proof an ontology and we are back to compressability, perhaps, a topic map of RDF assertions. So, a question to ask is what are the tests that could be applied to ensure the user of a vocabulary is using it correctly without requiring them to answer any arbitrary query? Note in the original source the comment about not requiring completeness or requiring the global users to share a theory. It seems reasonable to test the existence of assertions. We can look at multiple ontologies (contexts of assertions) and discover that multiple sources have the same assertion so establish evidence by multiple sources. We can never formally prove the assertion unless we both agree to a test of fact and commit to behave accordingly in a testable way. George W. Bush is the president-elect of the US. That is easy to test. George Bush is the legitimate president of the US. That is harder to test. George Bush will be a good president. That is impossible to test until we agree on the conditions to be met in the future. No, it doesn't end. Like a recursion, we tell it how deep is deep enough. The cabala ascribes the aleph in the golem's mouth for a reason. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Uche Ogbuji [mailto:uche.ogbuji@f...] I do think you and Len ask too much, but oh well. This is "a clear definition of terms"? Whatever, let's not get into a battle over the meaning of "meaning". I'm happy to seize on the mention of "human-readable text" as you do. RDF recommends the use of human-readable "label" tags in schematics. So at least the meta-meta data are described as you say, which is, I think the key part.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format