RE: In defense of meaninglessness: an ontologist's dilemma*

2011-06-23 Thread David Booth
Agreed. I think it is pretty clear that there are trade-offs between choosing identifiers that are mnemonic versus making them neutral, and different people will weigh those trade-offs differently, so there will never be full consensus on which approach is best. David On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 08:2

Re: In defense of meaninglessness: an ontologist's dilemma*

2011-06-23 Thread Joanne Luciano
Was posted, and comments appreciated. Was my comment posted about English being the standard language in aviation? --- Joanne On Jun 23, 2011, at 8:51 AM, Bob Futrelle wrote: > There is a spectrum here, from black to white. A house number, 223 Main > Street, is rather opaque,, whereas "The t

Re: In defense of meaninglessness: an ontologist's dilemma*

2011-06-23 Thread Bob Futrelle
There is a spectrum here, from black to white. A house number, 223 Main Street, is rather opaque,, whereas "The third house west of the southwest corner of Main and Jones" is less opaque. A real challenge is Japan, where the house addresses are numbered in the order in which the houses were const

RE: In defense of meaninglessness: an ontologist's dilemma*

2011-06-23 Thread Michel_Dumontier
Hi Sivaram, Identifiers, whether opaque or not, hold meaning when they identify some thing (or things) - otherwise they do not serve their intended purpose. Where there is disagreement is in terms of the syntax of the identifier. Some want to incorporate language mnemonic and others use an alp