[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: ANN: White Paper - "Using OWL to Avoid Syntactic Rigor Mor
At 11:40 17/04/2003 -0400, Roger L. Costello wrote: >Hi Folks, > >I have written a white paper[1] titled: > > "Using OWL to Avoid Syntactic Rigor Mortis" >[1] http://www.xfront.com/avoiding-syntactic-rigor-mortis.html Says <q>all parties participating in an exchange of data can compose any physical expression </q>. Isn't is necessary for the same grouping to agree terminology? I guess this is where the human aspects come in? Take some term, I understand it, David Carlisle understands it. Yet the depth of understanding is miles apart. How to assess each users usage wrt some ... standard semantic? If we attempt to communicate without that shared understanding its going to be a weak form of communications? I'm sure I'm not the only one who has had what appeared to be a strange conversation, which is finally resolved to be two views of the same term. Is ontology ownership destined to be a stumbling block? regards DaveP
|
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
|