![[Home]](http://www.bayleshanks.com/cartoonbayle.png)
Just wanted to write down my vision of a DebateNet? built on top of TagHog?.
|-----------|
| DebateNet |
|-----------|
|--------| |------------|
| TagHog | | Provenance |
|--------| |------------|
| Layer | Working name | Functions | Notes | ||||||
| Bottom | TagHog? | ||||||||
| * Concept of a proposition that: a particular predicate is true of a particular URI (call these "URI predicate propositions", or, "UPPropositions" for short) | |||||||||
| * Allow users to assert the affirmation or negation of a UPProposition | |||||||||
| * Predicates may (and should) have (non-formal) definitions | |||||||||
| * Allow users to define new predicates if they want | |||||||||
| * Assign URIs to predicates, to UPPropositions, and to assertions | |||||||||
| * Collaborative filtering to allow you to identify UPPropositions which have been affirmed (and not negated) by supposedly-trustworthy people | |||||||||
| Interoperates with social bookmarking services, Provenance | |||||||||
| Bottom | ?Provenance? | ||||||||
| * Associate URIs with people (as "authors" or "asserters" or "believers") | |||||||||
| * Allow users to assert the affirmation or negation of an association (i.e. assertions of UPPropositions with a predicate like "BobSaid?(X)") | |||||||||
| * Allow users to GPG-sign these assertions | |||||||||
| * Allow users to bulk-assert a group of assertions. This is done by asserting that a Provenance identity coincides with a user in a foreign assertion-tracking system (e.g. TagHog?); if this assertion is believed, then the assertions in that system are as if they are asserted by that Provenance identity (modulo your trust that the foreign system hasn't been hacked; after all, depending on how the foreign system works, those individual assertions may or may not have been individually GPG-signed) | |||||||||
| * Allow indirect attributions (i.e. Bayle asserts that CNN asserts that Obama said X) | |||||||||
| Interoperate with and avoid duplication of functionality with Nym, OpenId?, elsewhere | |||||||||
| Top | ?DebateNet?? | ||||||||
| * Regard some URIs as "argument nodes" | |||||||||
| * Associate argument nodes with typed links to other argument nodes ("supports", "refutes", subtypes such as "refutes: asserts that target is a logical fallacy". Subtypes may be parameterized with URIs (WHICH logical fallacy). The type hierarchy is open, as types are merely URIs. | |||||||||
| * Assign URIs to these links; links are themselves nodes and may be targeted by other nodes | |||||||||
| * Uses TagHog? to allow nodes to be asserted | |||||||||
| * Uses Provenance to associate URIs with people: testimony with its author, an argument (link) with asserters, a conclusion with believers | |||||||||
| Read up on related work; argument mapping, topic maps. Also, there are various related pages at CommunityWiki? | |||||||||
All layers:
Note that TagHog? and Provenance have other uses besides as a substrate for DebateNet?.
