[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
As I recall, the reason for UDDI and other discovery processes is
to provide a facade of what is public knowledge so that one can
then begin a negotiation to get more private knowledge, therefore,
establish a relationship. Typical contracting works like that
and I won't get into details here.
Pragmatics takes up that aspect of communication. Ontologies are
a way to get that done but there is no free semantic lunch. Standard
ontologies are one answer, but you'll find the debate about the
uppermost ontology to be fatiguing. When you look into business
intelligence systems (eg, applications of OLAP cubes vs massive
indexing over distributed resources), you will find the ontology
challenge yet again. What I am still sorting out is if there
is a clean separation of the pragmatic and the semantic layer.
I sort of doubt it but I'm still learning.
On the other hand, except for methods, it can be hard to tell
the difference between a document and an object even if you
can tell the difference between an object and data. That means
document is overloaded and ambiguous, so it is a classic
term that exists in superposition until measured. The point
of pragmatics, I guess, is a formal means to establish a protocol
of measures, aka, "right rock; wrong rock".
len
- Prev by Date:
Re: [xml-dev] Mailmen, POST, Intent, and Duck Typing
- Next by Date:
Re: [xml-dev] Mailmen, POST, Intent, and Duck Typing
- 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):
|