“The use of non-proprietary open formats is essential to ensure technical and semantic interoperability, for interaction with citizens and companies and to gain the necessary independence from ICT suppliers
…
The discussion paper and the public consultation website list the proposed open standards. Examples include SQL for database queries, PNG and SVG for graphics, and PDF and ODF for electronic documents. There are also tables listing standards for electronic mail, for geographic information systems, computer networking and for IT security.”
See Portugal seeks feedback on interoperability policyGone are the old days when any large or small organization took whatever M$ and “partners” offered as the only way to do IT. Now countries all around the world are dictating what they will and won’t accept. That’s refreshing. It also puts GNU/Linux on the inside track because almost everything that runs on GNU/Linux will be able to follow such open standards. With That Other OS, one would always have doubts. I like IT you can count on to work for you and not against you.
We’ve been here a while – search
Tags
- 2015 - Year of the GNU/Linux Desktop
- Acer
- adoption
- AMD
- android
- Apple
- ARM
- China
- cloud
- Debian
- Dell
- desktop
- education
- firearms
- FLOSS
- food
- garden
- GNU/Linux
- government
- HP
- hunting
- Intel
- LibreOffice
- Linux
- market share
- migration
- politics
- renewable energy
- Samsung
- security
- server
- small cheap computers
- smart phone
- software-patents
- Solo EV
- tablets
- that other OS
- thin client
- thin clients
- trolls
- Trumpism
- Ubuntu
- uptake
- weather
My Mission
My observations and opinions about IT are based on 40 years of use in science and technology and lately, in education. I like IT that is fast, cost-effective and reliable. My first use of GNU/Linux in 2001 was so remarkably better than what I had been using, I feel it is important work to share GNU/Linux with the world. Now that I'm retired I still use GNU/Linux on every computer in my home except the smartphones which run Android/Linux.Lately, I've been giving lots of thought to the world I inherited and which I will leave to my descendants. I'm planting grass, trees, flowers and vegetables in my large lot and I've ordered a Solo EV. I plan to charge my Solo by means of a tracking solar array. Life is good if you have a purpose. I do.
Outlinks
Posts
dougman really Satya Nadella is still ahead of Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates that had Blue/Red screens of death in Presentations.
As if Microshit is the alternative?…….LMAO!
It would appear that M$ still cannot do voice yet. Check it out!
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/video/2015/sep/17/microsoft-satya-nadella-ceo-cortana-video
Cortana is just another failure to add to the pile.
IT you can count on? Linux? Go back to scaring deer out of hedgerows.
Dr Loser you forgot the phrase “Fresnel Effect”.
As per normal DrLoser proves he cannot do a basic wikipedia search before commenting so goes off with a stack of bull crap.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_interoperability
http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2008/pdf/204_paper.pdf
Because lexical interoperability is not Semantic Interoperability and has been for ever.
Part of the reason I believe could say what ever bull crap I liked to people like DrLoser is the fact they go around making arguements without any homework so deserve to be responded to in kind.
To properly claim Semantic Interoperability requires provability in other words a test suite/compatibility meet-ups for comparing implementations and making sure they are compatible.
lexical interoperability only has to be theoretical. Semantic Interoperability to cover all real word cases has to be a very broad term.
Extended Backus–Naur Form might be something you use when making a Semantic Interoperability solution or might not be. Testing and conformation is the big thing about Semantic Interoperability tell me where EBNF or Antlr mandate testing of the different implementations. The answer is they don’t.
I don’t suppose anybody here has a clue what “semantic interoperability” means. I certainly don’t.
Let’s see now. Lexical interoperability would be a common understanding of how tokenization works, in respect of basic computer science theory. I’ll wave that one away as EBNF. If you prefer, you can choose Antlr or possibly even the lexer of the CLang bunch. In the old days, of course, it used to be Stallman’s flex. Which was excellent, btw.
Syntactic interoperability, now, syntactic interoperability is the next level up. As befits layered systems, it presupposes lexical interoperability.
Syntactic interoperability would seem to me to be nothing more and nothing less than a reference Abstract Syntax Tree. There may well be one out there: I don’t know.
That would obviously be the fundamental goal of Syntactic Interoperability, but it’s reasonable to presume a solution that falls short of the reference model. Provided that one can provably map any given AST to any other AST, I believe we can say that there exists Syntactic Interoperability.
“Semantic interoperability” is, however, a specious claim by either lawyers or marketroids or in very, very extreme cases the sort of person who claims that the likes of Web 2.0 means anything at all.
It’s pure bullshit, isn’t it?