Re: [xml-dev] Mailmen, POST, Intent, and Duck Typing

• To: "Chris Burdess" <d09@...>
• Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Mailmen, POST, Intent, and Duck Typing
• From: "Peter Hunsberger" <peter.hunsberger@...>
• Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:08:53 -0600
• Cc: "'xml-dev@...' org" <xml-dev@...>
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ouZA1ikQwEWq5ZImy3K+/hLqAa+tFaYCS9dPAsEQEgKZxkOtBfrxowOTOtzfPqDv/J2oSpP40Ab8iFzZ0qhwtrf+H0jRfX3siAisw+nVG+5TMUBYIPoXesKtKwR/XOq8Yx+cFcdUHq1iYmNKaHU9ed8zVPLSZbSHPs9PdTF3qgk=
• In-reply-to: <A2245B31-50C3-4555-8F7D-8D53F532EFAF@...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE0BB1FEE3@...> <cc159a4a0602240823k70f83abt7cc6832b7feffffe@...> <A2245B31-50C3-4555-8F7D-8D53F532EFAF@...>

On 2/24/06, Chris Burdess <d09@...> wrote:
> Peter Hunsberger wrote:
> >>  The point
> >> of pragmatics, I guess, is a formal means to establish a protocol
> >> of measures, aka, "right rock; wrong rock".
> >
> > I sort of conceptualize it as the rules for how discovery is done on
> > semantics. Sounds sort of similar?
>
> Semantic disambiguation by context is only one aspect of pragmatics.
> There's also paralinguistics, such as "what are you communicating by
> sending this message above and beyond the content of the message?",
> "what are you communicating by not sending a message?" (insert
> interferometer analogy here), "what can I infer about your intent
> when you send this message?"

Ugg.  Makes sense, but now I fear that we'll end up with Web
Psychiatrists:  "and tell me Mr. System, how did it make you feel when
BigCo declined to communicate with you".

Or worse, Web mediums: "I sense someone is attempting to communicate
with you about an order for 1000 widgets. Do widgets sound familiar?
Yes? That will be $200 please."

Seriously, do you see applications for that aspect of the field to the
Sem Web (other than perhaps a reason for celebration by the lawyers)?

--
Peter Hunsberger

• Prev by Date: Re: [xml-dev] XSD substitution groups, subtypes, nillable .. thewhole smack
• Next by Date: RE: [xml-dev] Did Documents Win? No. Objects Just Couldn't GetTheir Act Together.
• Previous by thread: Re: [xml-dev] Mailmen, POST, Intent, and Duck Typing
• Next by thread: Re: [xml-dev] Mailmen, POST, Intent, and Duck Typing
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread