Re: defining the semantics of lists
Patrick J Hayes <[email protected]> Fri, 12 Jun 2020 03:14:04 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.w3c.semantic-web |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--Apple-Mail=_A11FB8D9-7CF6-4672-B210-5096BFA5C447 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > On Jun 10, 2020, at 5:02 PM, thomas l=C3=B6rtsch <[email protected]> wrote: >=20 ... > The situation with lists is a classic SNAFU. But lists are the easiest = part. Identifcation is broken and no one even cares anymore. "Just use = AI to disambiguate" I hear. Reification is a mess (and RDF* in its = current state might make it better, or worse) and Named Graphs have no = semantics, so there is no sound meta modelling in RDF. Whoa. Named graphs have a really crisp, IMO actually rather beautiful, = semantics which makes the ideas of committment and publication = semantically exact, using the fundamental idea of a performative. Read = the paper that introduced the terminology for details: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3D3199260 especially section 8. Unfortunately, this semantics (and indeed the very idea of named graphs) = was never warranted by the W3C, so remains only a suggestion. It is = still a damn good suggestion, however.=20 Pat --Apple-Mail=_A11FB8D9-7CF6-4672-B210-5096BFA5C447 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" <html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; = -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=3D""><br = class=3D""><div><br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div = class=3D"">On Jun 10, 2020, at 5:02 PM, thomas l=C3=B6rtsch <<a = href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" class=3D"">[email protected]</a>> wrote:</div><br = class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"></blockquote>...<br = class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div class=3D""><span = style=3D"caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: = 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: = normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; = text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; = -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; float: none; = display: inline !important;" class=3D"">The situation with lists is a = classic SNAFU. But lists are the easiest part. Identifcation is broken = and no one even cares anymore. "Just use AI to disambiguate" I hear. = Reification is a mess (and RDF* in its current state might make it = better, or worse) and Named Graphs have no semantics, so there is no = sound meta modelling in RDF.</span></div></blockquote><br = class=3D""></div><div>Whoa. Named graphs have a really crisp, IMO = actually rather beautiful, semantics which makes the ideas of = committment and publication semantically exact, using the fundamental = idea of a performative. Read the paper that introduced the terminology = for details:</div><div><br class=3D""></div><div><a = href=3D"https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3D3199260" = class=3D"">https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3D3199260</= a></div><div><br class=3D""></div><div>especially section = 8.</div><div><br class=3D""></div><div>Unfortunately, this semantics = (and indeed the very idea of named graphs) was never warranted by the = W3C, so remains only a suggestion. It is still a damn good suggestion, = however. </div><div><br class=3D""></div><div>Pat</div><div><br = class=3D""></div></body></html>= --Apple-Mail=_A11FB8D9-7CF6-4672-B210-5096BFA5C447--