|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML Really Extens
<Quote1> I am not saying that given sufficient _other_ information, that a program cannot so interpret the snippet ... for example, application level semantics. </Quote1> Yes - I was actually thinking of "human-level" semantics; the ability of a human to interpret the meaning of data based on its surrounding XML tags. <Quote2> On the other hand, the XML Schema specification does not provide such semantics. </Quote2> I beg to differ - and I'm sure it's because I am looking at semantics from a different standpoint here. I respectfully acknowledge our different viewpoints regarding semantics, and do not in any way think that yours (or anyone else's here) is incorrect. Just that I view the meaning of "semantics" very differently. I'll respectfully step aside from this debate, so as not to muddy the waters. Kind Regards, Joe Chiusano Booz | Allen | Hamilton Jonathan Borden wrote: > > Chiusano Joseph wrote: > > > <Quote1> > > XML Schema thus provides a form of semantics to the XML document, i.e. > > that such element content is to be treated as a decimal number. > > </Quote1> > > > > Yes - and in your opinion would the following XML snippet: > > > > <ApplicantEstimatedAmount>12.30</ApplicantEstimatedAmount> > > > > provide a form of semantics to the data - i.e. that the data represents > > the estimated amount that an applicant requested, given that it occurs > > in the context of - for example - a loan application? This added context > > would therefore enhance the sematics provided by the > > "ApplicantEstimatedAmount" tag to enable it to be interpreted as "the > > amount that an applicant requested for a loan". > > I am not saying that given sufficient _other_ information, that a program > cannot so interpret the snippet ... for example, application level > semantics. On the other hand, the XML Schema specification does not provide > such semantics. > > > > > <Quote2> > > It doesn't state what units, for example, the number is intended to > > represent, e.g. 12.3 froggets, or 12.30 euros. > > </Quote2> > > > > Yes - but what if it did? For example: > > > > <ApplicantEstimatedAmount > > currencyCode="USD">12.30</ApplicantEstimatedAmount> > > > > Sure, specifications can define semantics for XML. The RDF/OWL semantics do > so for XML that conforms to the RDF/XML syntax. Writing a model theory is > one way to formally define a particular semantics. Other semantics might be > specified in the english language prose of a specification. That too is a > semantics, just not one that machines do a great job of properly > understanding. That why we still need human programmers to translate the > semantics of a written specification into a (machine) application. Much of > the idea behind creating machine processable ontologies etc. is that this > allows generic programs, e.g. inference engines, to do more, just as > computer languages greatly facilitate the porting of applications to > different platforms, and even, in the case of a more comprehensive semantics > such as is defined by the java virtual machine, enable applications to (very > frequently) operate across platforms without the need for human tweaking of > the application for a given platform/CPU. > > Jonathan begin:vcard n:Chiusano;Joseph tel;work:(703) 902-6923 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.bah.com org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012; version:2.1 email;internet:chiusano_joseph@b... title:Senior Consultant fn:Joseph M. Chiusano end:vcard
|
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
|
|||||||||

Cart








