Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
"Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...> writes: > God aside, I think it's the nature of the subjects > being discussed this particular week. URIs and > semantics are both contentious zones, where using > words in particular ways can madden people quickly. The astrologically inclined may wish to examine the correlation between these conversations (or the frequency with which the word "semantics" occurs in them) and Mercury being in retrograde. Someday we'll wake up and realize that, from an information management-and-interchange perspective, it's very, very useful for an element to declare that it's an instance of multiple element types, and to be able to invoke full syntactic validation of such instances against all their classes, in syntactic space, including both context and content. Anything less is suboptimal as a basis for flexible, mix-and-match information interchange via XML, among people who want to cooperate with each other, but who have endlessly specialized local requirements. Architectural forms, anyone? http://www.hytime.org/htnews.html (first paragraph) I'm puzzled by Simon's announced intention to avoid confronting the nasty little problem of actually interchanging knowledge, and to focus instead on purely lexical issues. If we don't want to communicate, what's the point of linguistics? -- Steve Steven R. Newcomb, Consultant srn@c... voice: +1 972 359 8160 fax: +1 972 359 0270 1527 Northaven Drive Allen, Texas 75002-1648 USA
|
