My Photo

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

January 2015

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Blog powered by Typepad

Become a Fan

« Predicate-based Link Analysis: A Post 9/11 Analysis (1+1= 13) | Main | "Need to Know" vs. "Need to Share" – A Very Fine Line Indeed »

April 26, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452946769e200e55072d3a28833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference To Know Semantic Reconciliation is to Love Semantic Reconciliation:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jim Harper

Huh. Sounds distinctly like a way to defeat people's attempts to remain obscure to corporations and governments. I'm not in love.

Bruce Wallace

There is a trick you are missing that I wrote about in my blog entries here...
http://existentialprogramming.blogspot.com/search?q=superman

The point in those entries was that Philosophy of Language points out that resolving different "names" of a single entity to the correct single entity is not sufficient.

Different names may well refer to different aspects of the same entity that are not interchangeable.

E.G. Superman and Clark Kent both resolve to the same single physical entity, but attributes of Clark Kent (e.g. work address, favorite suit, needs glasses) have different values than the corresponding attributes of Superman. [Different names for different aspects.]

E.G. Shakespeare-the-historical-figure might not always be considered the same entity as Shakespeare-the-author-of-Hamlet. [Same name (Shakespeare) for different aspects *which might not even be recognized as separate aspects at the time the original "data" is collected*.]

The comments to this entry are closed.