On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Gregg Reynolds <d...@mobileink.com> wrote:
> > Well, you're way ahead of me. I don't even "get" adjunctions, to tell you > the truth. By which I mean that I have no intuition about them; it's not so > hard to understand the formal definition, but it's another thing altogether > to grasp the deep significance. > > Exactly. It just looks like we can only "grasp" something if we managed to match synthetic knowledge with analytic knowledge to state it in more "philosophical" terms. > Completely off topic: a few months ago I had an idea about using category > theory to provide rigorous semantics for the web (esp. rdf stuff etc.) I'll > probably never find time to work out the details, but it's a fun exercise in > any case; if you want to mess around with applying CT to the real world > maybe you can coem up with improvements. See > http://blog.mobileink.com/2011/03/resource-token-exchange.html. It's a > bit of a mess, and some of it I would radically revise, but it might give > you some ideas, if you're interested in the semantic web thingee. > > I am indeed. And will definitely go through it, thanks. Regards, Arnaud
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
