Over the past few posts, I have been using a literary example from Through the Looking Glass to discuss concepts associated with semantics and taxonomies, and I am going to adapt the example somewhat so that we can get a better handle on things. (By the way, that was a joke, since “handle” is a word sometimes used to refer to a thing’s name. ha ha.)

Let’s look at our naming and taxonomy using a different underlying object class:

• There is a “thing” that is a VEHICLE, which is “CAR”
• That VEHICLE has a VEHICLE_NAME, which is “FORD FIESTA”
• That VEHICLE_NAME has a VEHICLE_NAME_CALLING, which is “JXX35671”
• The VEHICLE has a VEHICLE_CALLING, which is “Loshin’s Car"

The base class is a “CAR,” and there is a derived class that is designated as its NAME (“FORD FIESTA”) yet remains a subclass of the base class. That specific thing has an additional means of reference, namely a license plate that is the VEHICLE_NAME_CALLING. Abstractly, at some point in time whatever car I drive is called “Loshin’s Car,” and at this specific time it is the “FORD FIESTA” that is CALLed “JXX35671”.

Of course, I am introducing my own implicit meanings and semantics by referring to ideas that we are already familiar with: I referred to a license plate number without saying it was a license plate number, and I relied on our knowledge of automobile manufacturers and model type for classification without telling you that I was going to do that. I also introduced a referencing scheme without explaining what that scheme meant.

Was that just a dirty trick? Not really, since we do this all the time when we neglect the proper attention to the reference data, classification models, and how those are adapted practically across multiple models in the organization.