[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Musings on the fundamental nature of data
- From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
- To: "xml-dev@lists.xml.org" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:26:11 +0000
Hi Folks,
The subject line is the short title. Here is the longer title:
Musings on the fundamental nature of the knowledge
that is captured from a domain expert and the subsequent
exchange of that knowledge as data
Consider this scenario: You conduct multiple in-depth discussions/interviews with someone who is a Subject Matter Expert (SME) and you capture that person's knowledge by encoding it as data using some syntax such as XML.
What knowledge do you deem important for encoding as data?
Presumably the data will be shared -- exchanged -- with others. What data do you want others to have?
This knowledge might be worth encoding as data:
If there are geometric shapes, then it might be
worthwhile to encode knowledge about the shapes
so that others can reconstruct the shapes, should
that be desired.
If there is a need to control something, then it might
be worthwhile to encode knowledge about how to
control the "thing" so that others with access to a
"thing" can control it, should that be desired.
If there are places involved, then it might be worthwhile
to encode knowledge about the location of the place so
that others can go to that place (or send something to
that place), should that be desired.
If there is an item for which there are many occurrences,
then it might be worthwhile to encode knowledge that
identifies the item so that others can obtain their own
copy of the item, should that be desired.
Observe the recurring pattern. The knowledge that is worth encoding as data is that data which, when exchanged, allows the recipient to replicate, to some extent, the sender's worldview:
The sender has a shape. Upon receipt of the shape data
the recipient can replicate the shape.
The sender is controlling some "thing". Upon receipt of
the control data the recipient can replicate controlling
a "thing".
The sender is at some location. Upon receipt of the location
data the recipient can replicate the experience of being
at the same location.
The sender has an item. Upon receipt of the identifying
data the recipient can replicate the item by obtaining his
own copy of the item.
Assertion: The most fundamental issue with data exchange is:
What worldview do you want replicated?
I welcome your insights on this subject.
/Roger
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]