Fwd: [xml-dev] Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML ReallyExtensible?

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

This is actually more important for us, Len, than it is for the 
xml-dev list, (some large number here)% won't have a clue what you 
are talking about.

Would you please post a fewURLs for Sowa for our lurkers, and review 
material for me. I'm lazy. I don't want to slog through the muddy 
lowlands, to get to shoreline, to dig up a pile of oysters, and 
finally get to the pearls. Mea Culpa.

BTW, for those Cogno-scenti among us, the Harnad piece is pretty foundational.

Ciao,
Rex

>Mailing-List: contact xml-dev-help@lists.xml.org; run by ezmlm
>X-No-Archive: yes
>List-Post: <mailto:xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:xml-dev-help@lists.xml.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org>
>Delivered-To: mailing list xml-dev@lists.xml.org
>From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
>To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
>Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:23:04 -0500
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=7.0
>	tests=none
>	version=2.55
>X-Spam-Level:
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp)
>Subject: [xml-dev] Symbol Grounding and Running Code:  Is XML Really 
>Extensible?
>X-Rcpt-To: <rexb@starbourne.com>
>X-DPOP: Version number supressed
>Status: U
>
>Noting the articles from Tim Bray [1] and Jon Udell [2],
>knowing as most here do that the winking and nudging
>over namespace semantic assignments is really
>just the next level of semantic assignment to
>XML productions in general, it seems that now
>is a good time to discuss means for this.
>
>I agree with Tim that XML is a name/label/structure
>system and as such, doesn't care much about this
>debate. However, that simply says the developer
>has to care, so we still have to face up to the
>symbol grounding problem elaborated in detail
>by Charles Peirce in his papers on semiotics over
>a hundred years ago and clarified in the works
>of John Sowa.  Harnad [3] explains it satisfactorily
>in terms of AI approaches including combining
>connection systems (eg, neural netws) with symbol
>systems.  All good background, but there are other
>approaches and we should explore these. 
>
>In short, clearly namespaces enable composability
>at the syntactic level.  Just as clearly, many
>combinations are meaningless.  As Harnad says
>when defining systematicity:
>
>"The patterns of interconnections do not decompose, combine
>and recombine according to a formal syntax that can be given
>a systematic semantic interpretation."
>
>So in effect, we can create namespace aggregates
>which are not systematic. So via namespaces,
>any set of XML application productions (by which
>I mean, a production from HTML, from SVG, from
>X3D, or XSLT) can be combined and be syntactically
>correct. 
>
>How can one determine:
>
>1.  If a given combination is meaningful
>2.  How to discover that meaning
>3.  How to assign that combination or even a single
>     production to a running piece of code
>
>Item three is where the rubber meets the road.
>
>a.  Does RDF address these questions?
>b.  Is it better for worse particulary for item 3
>     than say using stylesheet assignments
>c.  Are other approaches such as abstract
>     object models as good or better than RDF for
>     writing the rules of a semantically valid
>     combination?
>
>Next, is it desirable or workable that any
>arbitrary combination of XML productions from
>any language be meaningful?  I think the answer
>here is no and leads back to 1.
>
>I think this an important topic because it touches
>on issues such as when should two application language
>working groups seek convergence, can we create
>XML application languages that don't set of IP tripwires
>by ensuring implementations based on IP aren't a part
>of the language definition, should we begin to classify
>semantically valid XML production combinations, and where
>in that will standardization impede innovation,
>is it really a good idea to use a standard namespace
>name to point to running code?
>
>len
>
>[1] http://tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/08/11/SymbolGrounding
>[2] http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/2003/08/11.html#a775
>[3] http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Papers/Harnad/harnad90.sgproblem.html
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>


-- 
Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email: rexb@starbourne.com
Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request