trans© trailmarker

The way we normally use databases, 
whether SQL or document-object model, 
is for archiving abstract details, extracting classifiable parts of whatever is being represented by the data. 
This is absolutely necessary, of course, 
but notice that it is 
rather we are extracting detail. 
Abstracting details, 
or in other words defining and utilizing data structures that represent things,
is an essential aspect of the practice of programming —

- state : no programming without data structures, schematizing

Programming is unlike human communication, 
whereas there is the possibility of communication without language, 
and this is important 
- state :
- are we? : is that what we seek
What is the kind of 'truth' we are seeking that is suitable and 
belonging to human beings? 
We are ultimately reaching for
- state : a positive, pragmatic, holo-subjective epistemology.

I wanted to mention that, 
- state : epistemological limits of schemas and data models
We must realize from the start, 
- nice :
that our data models will not, cannot encapsulate truth. Period. 

No matter how intricately, even beautifully we may design our schemas, 
no matter their functionality and utility, 
- state : truth is not reducible to abstract details.

So what are the truth-telling tools available to us? 
And how does all this fit together? 
Why am I here to discuss data models, 
if I don't believe that they can capture truth? 
To be clear about the origin of my thinking, 
I have been influenced by the readings of Jacques Derrida. 
Although I admit that I really only have had a rather cursory tour of 
the philosophical move has been very influential for my thinking, 
despite that multiple people who I respect have 
openly despised deconstructionism and 
its relationship to post modernism and
the so-called 'end of truth'. 
I actually don't believe that deconstructionism does signal the end of truth, 
rather I see that the work is half done.

What I have understood from my reading of deconstructionism is that 'the text' is irreducible. 
Sure, we can read it and write over it. We can reference this and that text and write between them, 
but this practice of 
- state : commentary no substitute for the original text
Rather, what we are doing is 
- state :
Is this beginning to 
- state :
It's simply 
- state :

The later deconstructionists talk about a kind of "applied grammatology," 
an application of "the science of writing". This is very curious to me, and I wonder: 
- state : Is it time for an Programmatology?

Yarrow Love, [01.05.21 18:36]
I also just want to mention briefly that 
- state : 
  • by 'text' I mean any well formed, recorded communication, 
  • whether that is the recorded word, an article or a book, a documentary or a photo, etc. 
  • Each is a kind of text and all forms of communication deserve to be made way for in the creative commons. 

The full breadth of human expression deserves to be honored 
and wielded for the collective purpose of articulating meaning 
in the places of power. 
So I am here to discuss data models and what technologies are available 
(graph databases?) for mapping intertextual relationships and embedding nuance.
- respond : Me Too, Gyuri