The trouble with “Semantic” anything, is that it’s so easy to get “wrong” and so hard to get "right". Meaning-making uses context cues---metadata---in addition to the dictionary semantics---the data.
Arbitrarily remixing of data and metadata gives us our real world, where The Official Standard (Or Else) says one thing about `AThing`, and We, The People use AThing in a way that completely violates the official intent, but makes complete sense in the narrow sense that it is being used.
Concretely, `<div>` is to HTML, what `F#@!` is to natural language (not just the Queen’s English). It can mean any number of things depending on where it is, when it is, how it is, or why it is. Slap on the right AIRA and you can say `<div>` off to anybody on the Internet.
Or is it `<div>`, I love you so much for reading this?
The trouble with “Semantic” anything, is that it’s so easy to get “wrong” and so hard to get "right". Meaning-making uses context cues---metadata---in addition to the dictionary semantics---the data.
Arbitrarily remixing of data and metadata gives us our real world, where The Official Standard (Or Else) says one thing about `AThing`, and We, The People use AThing in a way that completely violates the official intent, but makes complete sense in the narrow sense that it is being used.
Concretely, `<div>` is to HTML, what `F#@!` is to natural language (not just the Queen’s English). It can mean any number of things depending on where it is, when it is, how it is, or why it is. Slap on the right AIRA and you can say `<div>` off to anybody on the Internet.
Or is it `<div>`, I love you so much for reading this?
(edit: fix typos)