RE: [xml-dev] Approaches to Expanding the Semantics of a Communty's Self

[Len Bullard <len.bullard@uai.com>]

True, Joel, down-translation or up-translation is always an option as long
as you can get them to agree to use it.  Still it will have to validated and
checked, so the issue is still how many variations are expected, and then
what is the source (cause) of the variations. One has to weigh the costs of
affordance maintenance at scale vs just-in-time conformance to the local
norms.   The trick of self-interest is it must be self-evident.

Regards egos:  weak rationality is a fact of life.  Budget for it.

len


From: Joel Bender [mailto:jjb5@cornell.edu] 

(4+1) Recognize that there may already be an ontology like FOAF that 
describes the same content that every can agree requires the same amount 
of work for each community for a translator for their format.  Each 
community can then feel like they aren't giving anything up, and there's 
fewer egos involved in deciding which one is better.


Joel
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.