Talk:Schema

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Stub article

From the main page:

this is a stub article - the idea of a schema needs a broader treatment than just being called a subset of an ontology

Yes. I agree, if only because I don't understand what that means. But I don't think this note should be on the page itself. --KQ 21:13 Aug 21, 2002 (PDT)

[edit] Genetic algorightms similarity schema

Is it a set of entities or the template that represents that set? -Pgan002 00:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Database schema

Why are "software architecture" and "Active directory" mentioned in the disambiguation page?! This clearly violates the WP Syle Guide of disambiguation pages. I also think that "conceptual graph", "semantic network", "semantic web" and "data model" sould not be mentioned. Disambiguation pages should only have a brief definition of each use and refer the reader to a specific page. If there is no page about a specific use of a term, I think that either one should be created or the entry deleted. -Pgan002 00:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prior knowledge

Surely "schema" never means "prior knowledge"! -Pgan002 00:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Specialized ontology

Is it the set of questions or the actual ontology, i.e. the entities?

[edit] Loose and unspecific?

As it stands, this (stub) article begins with "A schema in general is a specific, well-documented, and consistent plan. The related word, scheme means a loosely described plan." I don't know where this comes from, or why I should doubt my dictionary, but the statement implies that a scheme isn't specific, well documented, or consistent. What nonsense! And though they're both called "plans," schemes are loosely-described? If that's the case, all it would take is for somebody to describe a scheme "tightly" (whatever that means), and it would change from being a scheme to a schema! The fact is, "scheme" and "schema" both come from the same Greek word, and the latter (presumably more pedantic, since it's Greek) has crept into usage only to distinguish certain things from schemes, for whatever reason. My dictionary gives two meanings for schema: first that it's a scheme, and second, that it's a word used in Kantian epistemology. I know very little about Kant or epistemology, but I suspect that Kant wrote in German. I wouldn't be surprised to discover either that German doesn't distinguish between scheme and schema, or that Kant chose a Greek word to coin a neologism, for the sake of cant! Unfree (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)