Re: [xtm-wg] Re : Topics, Subjects, Things

[Jack Park <jackpark@verticalnet.com>]

I think this post simply amazing.  If nothing else, it reminded me of a talk
I once heard on the use of the shastric Sanskrit as a KR scheme by Rick
Briggs.  It appeared in an issue of AI Magazine.  Via google.com, I found
this:

27. See, for example, Rick Briggs, "Knowledge Representation in Sanskrit and
Artificial Intelligence," AI Magazine 6 (1985), no. 1; Rick Briggs,
"Shastric Sanskrit as a Machine Translation Interlingua," paper presented at
workshop on "Pannini and Artificial Intelligence," Indian Institute of
Science, Bangalore, 1986.

at this web site: http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu04te/uu04te11.htm.
I found a bit more on Sanskrit at
http://www.vhp.org/d.Dimensions_of_VHP/5Sanskrit/10hv69_Sanskrit_59_60.htm
Briggs' case was based upon the notion that the language was about as
ambiguity-free as you could get. Indeed, this year, a two-year research
course on natural language processing involving Sanskrit Shastras has
already started. See http://www.iiit.net/new/nlpbrochure.htm   (oh, to be a
fly on the wall in that group!).

Exploring the vedavid.org site, especially http://vedavid.org/xml/ proved
very valuable. However, at this writing, the "OLD" Vedavid index page is
still sitting there with the animated gif swirling around, after nearly 10
minutes!  The page never mutated.

We need to talk a lot more about this web site. However, I tend to think
this discussion is somewhat off-topic for the XTM-WG, which is extremely
busy trying to get XTM v 1.0 out in 6 weeks.  I'd like to think we could
move this discussion to the other topic maps list at topicmapmail@infoloom.
Sorry, I couldn't find the subscription information at www.infoloom.com.

Cheers
Jack Park


From: John Robert Gardner <John.Robert.Gardner@east.sun.com>

> Greetings . . . following from Bernard's thread:
>
> #Anyway, what I pick from Ann's answer is that it's easier for now to map
> #the part of the real world implemented in computers, data bases, real
> #networks ... than to map the concepts "in our minds".
>
> It's an interesting question-- yet nonetheless, the success of the mapping
for
> the "real world implemented . . ." depends on how
transparently/intuitively this
> correlates with what we have in our minds . . .and there, as it were, lies
the
> rub.  Cf. the various searches for terminological structure.  Matt West's
> article lead to some further digging what has turned up two possible zones
of
> malleable and human-concept-to-real-world-concept mapping ontologies.
>
> In the first case, his correlation in section 5.1.4 of Organisational
levels
> with a conceptual association of sorts between Temporal
> Relationships/Associations (5.1.3.4) and States (5.1.3.5) allows for both
> process and class to classify as one entity, in my understanding, a way to
think
> of his otherwise not overly-fleshed out 4D entities.
>
> In a similar vein, then, consider the theory of ritual, for instance that
of the
> processual nature of ritual entities advanced by Victor Turner (The Ritual
> Process) and given that specific terminology first by Keyes (1976) [cf.
Deflem's
> paper on the web at
(http://www.sla.purdue.edu/people/soc/mdeflem/zturn.htm)].
> It is worth suggesting that in the notions of ritual we have both the
capacity
> and specificity to represent the real world concepts in resonant human
terms.
> Regardless the ontology, Turner and others' work reflects the dynamic of
the
> ritual structure of relations and temporal association structures.  These,
in
> turn leave artifacts which themselves evoke further relations,
association,
> classes, and states.  This moves us past some of teh more overt
limitations of,
> for instance, traditional UML class diagrams wherein changing associations
and
> relations layer the procedure sometimes beyond usable interpretability.
>
> In "real world terms" -- consider the ritual of software programming:
there are
> chaotic and progressive ordering states which follow predictable
progressions
> and iterations.  Even when there is variance, this variance--debugging,
e.g.,
> --is itself ritualized.  In South Asian Vedic terms, this would be the
expiation
> rites of prayascitta.  The segue is warranted as Turner's work--while
suggestive
> of useful terminological frontiers--is also fairly spartan and committed
to a
> certain intrinsic view of language which leaves his work less suited to
> construction of ontologies.
>
> I suggest instead work done on the meaninglessness of ritual, by Fritz
Staal,
> (article in Numen some years back "THe Meaninglessness of Ritual), as a
> conceptual framework within which to work.  Staal posited that, rather
than
> meaning something in and of itself (e.g., and imitatable quantity of
meaning,
> a.k.a. Skinner), it was itself a ritual, and as a meaningless ritual,
language
> is a spatio-temporal association of states.  These are iterative and
processual.
>  Much more consistent, then, with Chomsky's view on langauge and--at the
same
> time--(hang on, I'm taking a tight turn to the primary topic of this list)
more
> representative of the evolving structure of the Web.
>
> # I can understand and must agree with that. OTOH, the "real chaotic Web"
is
> #anyway sort of good projection of the complexity of concepts and visions
of
> #the world of authors and users, so mapping the Web is more or less
mapping
> #the concepts. And maybe the only way to do it for now, a nice piece of a
> #program to begin with anyway!
>
> Yes! This is EXACTLY the problem space of ancient ritualists: faced with a
> chaos-- the world around them--of which some components had mappable
concepts of
> varying complexity.
>
> #But from my viewpoint, being good only at metaphysics and ontology, I
take
> #the challenge to start from scratch real world - people acting around
> #themes with tools inside social dynamics - help them build an ontology of
> #their action, clarify the concepts they use and implement it as a
> #collectiveTM.
>
> I fully agree.
>
> ritualistically and respectfully,
>
> john robert.
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
> John Robert Gardner
> Enterprise Management Architecture Group
> Sun Microsystems Inc.,
> MailStop UBUR02-306
> 1 Network Drive
> Burlington, MA  01803-0903 |  "Failure is not an option"
> |
> Ph. 781-442-0692 |  Eugene Crantz
> Fax 781-442-1539 |  NASA
> e-mail  john.robert.gardner@sun.com
> -----------------------------------
> http://vedavid.org/diss/
> http://vedavid.org/xml/docs/



============================================================================
This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may
contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not
the intended recipient, dissemination of this communication is prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please erase all copies
of the message and its attachments and notify postmaster@verticalnet.com
immediately.
============================================================================


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Last minute trips at  
first-rate discounts 
from Hotwire.
http://click.egroups.com/1/9748/4/_/337252/_/972572633/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com