SUO: Re: Semantic interoperability
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net>
> A sender's system S is _semantically operable_ with a receiver's
> system R if and only if the follow condition holds for any data p
> that is transmitted from S to R:
> For every statement q that is implied by p on the system S,
> there is a statement q' on the system R that
> (1) is implied by p on the system R, and
> (2) is logically equivalent to q.
> It is possible that the receiver R may have more implications than
> the sender intended, but the receiver must at least be able to derive
> a logically equivalent implication for every implication of the sender's
> system.
So does this not mean that the receiver must ~know~ everything that the
sender ~knows~? I'm using "~know~" in a very loose sense here, just to get
an overall understanding of your term "semantic interoperability". In
other words: if {Sender (semantically operable with) Receiver} according to
your definition above, how could the Sender tell the Receiver anything new ?
Could you provide an example of the Sender telling the Receiver something
new ? What am I missing? Wouldn't a relationship that represented the term
'is consistent with' be more useful ?
Oh, and I made the obligatory mentograph to study this and used namespaces
for as many of the relationships as I thought I knew:
http://robustai.net/mentography/semanticOperable.gif
Seth Russell