[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
[Recent Entries]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: What is declarative XML? (And what's not)
- From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
- To: "'Greg Hunt'" <greg@firmansyah.com>, "'XML Developers List'" <xml-dev@l...>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 19:19:23 -0500
Greg:
“How do you exclude assumed semantics?”
What is a satisfactory semantic for ‘semantic’?
We imagine we understand it then default to syntax. We “assume”.
Semantics default to systems. Rick’s examples
demonstrates where those tradeoffs emerge in the structures we prefer given
alternatives. Why div class=?
I’m not assuming semantics but
qualifying them by asking why does the order <div class=warning have a
higher frequency than <warning? My model:
entanglement. Multiple systems/sources are being controlled or
controlling the markup. The intensity of the semantic in the system is
set by the use of the system, it’s behaviors over time and how those
behaviors result in semantically coherent communications among system users. Semantic
strength as intensity is fun because it is a simple scalar. Otherwise,
it is amplitude.
Given <div class= (warning or note) is
the probability of one of the members affected by the div? No. Only
the probability of the set itself given the class and the class given the div.
To which systems are each of the members
significant? Is the syntax or containment significant to the
systems? Why that preferred structure?
Systems entanglement is a reasonable model.
Kurt: not quantum XML except insofar
as features of XML map to quantum concepts. It is a model of systems
phasing and the affect of it on communications. Consider the
example from Raph Koster’s list about character and environment
persistence. How much state maintenance is worth it?
How much dynamic complexity can an observer observe before it becomes
deconstructive interference? In games, this is not just a model of
rendering but of game play itself and the choices game designers have to make
to ensure a game is fun and coherent given multiple players.
Coherence is a quality of game play, therefore, of transformations over time.
As to the probability strength, it seems to me that it is not in the
markup. It is in the process. The markup is the interference
pattern.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Hunt
[mailto:greg@firmansyah.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 1:43
AM
To: XML Developers List
Subject: Re: What is
declarative XML? (And what's not)
Fuzziness
is not only a feature of quantum mechanics, its a core feature of human
communication... and that fuzziness is what causes Roger's desire for
self-contained/processing-semantics-free and processing contexst-free documents
to break down. How do you exclude assumed semantics?
I'm also not convinced that Len is trying to be intelligible.
Greg
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com> wrote:
Oh, god, we're entering into the world of quantum
XML!!
Overall, however, I'm not sure this is the most accurate conceptual metaphor.
I'm much more inclined to see various potentially overlapping models as being
frames of reference in describing reality, in essence more of a relativistic
approach, with transformations acting as tensors mapping completely or
incompletely between these frames of reference.
The problem with contemporary computational semantics (RDF et al) is that
assertions are binary - there is absolutely nothing in RDF that can be used to
view assertions in a stochastic or fuzzy manner, which is one of the
fundamental characteristics of quantum systems. You can make a reasonably
strong case for being able to make logical inferences with RDF - this was what
it grew out of, of course. However, there's no formal mechanism in RDF as it
stands right now to be able to say "the probability or strength of
assertion X is 0.75". That's not to say that this couldn't be introduced,
mind you, and I'm not so sure that it's necessarily a bad idea, though the
processing becomes considerably more complex at that point once you do make
that step.
Kurt Cagle
Managing Editor
http://xmltoday.org/
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
wrote:
The concept analogizes semantic coherence to
interferometric visibility and
semantic intensity to intent of communicative speech act as expressed in the
syntax.
Treat the name and label particles like wave functions where each element
has intensity.
What would the coherence/decoherence properties of RDF be contrasted to
HTML? I think the coherence length of RDF statements would be better
because they are unentangled until related.
len
_______________________________________________________________________
XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
|
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
|
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
RSS 2.0 |
|
Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats,
enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.
|
Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website.
they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please
click here.
|
|