Re: [xml-dev] The perils of P18S (was Re: [xml-dev] Why RDF is hard )
In a message dated 19/11/2002 15:03:03 GMT Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
Now there is a wonderful piece of circular logic. <grin/>
<hands_raised_in_surrender>I can't argue against it being true that "anything expressible can be expressed".</hands_raised_in_surrender> :)
I love some of the weirdnesses of computer science. What other discipline would put the root at the top of a tree? :)
Interestingly the "anything expressible can be expressed" to some degree mirrors biases which have existed in the biological and other sciences for centuries - what is measurable can be measured and (implicitly) what is measurable is what is important.
Perhaps in your context too the important simply can't be expressed? :)
Andrew Watt
[email protected] scripsit:
> However, it doesn't seem to me that claims of universality which are a
> million miles from practical reality strengthens the case for RDF.
RDF is called a universal assertion language in the same sense that (Turing-
complete) programming languages are called universal: anything expressible
can be expressed.
Now there is a wonderful piece of circular logic. <grin/>
<hands_raised_in_surrender>I can't argue against it being true that "anything expressible can be expressed".</hands_raised_in_surrender> :)
I love some of the weirdnesses of computer science. What other discipline would put the root at the top of a tree? :)
Interestingly the "anything expressible can be expressed" to some degree mirrors biases which have existed in the biological and other sciences for centuries - what is measurable can be measured and (implicitly) what is measurable is what is important.
Perhaps in your context too the important simply can't be expressed? :)
Andrew Watt