OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] What is declarative XML? (And what's not)

I don't really get this because of the Alabama accent, but I think I  

On Jun 2, 2009, at 8:19 PM, Len Bullard wrote:

> 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: [xml-dev] 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]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS