[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] CCTONT work progress

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Peter Denno <peter.denno@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:48:59 -0400
Message-id: <200410271548.59071.peter.denno@xxxxxxxx>
Hi,    (01)

> Monica J. Martin said:
> * Code. Type: SymbolicString - This is not about brevity. It is
>      about a consistent mechanism to type information in order to
>      provide a baseline for representation.  May need further review.    (02)

Agreed. I'm not sure equating Code Type with SymbolicString is sufficient.    (03)

03-001 Code Type     (04)

  "A character string (letters, figures or symbols) that for brevity 
   and/or language independence may be used to represent or replace 
   a definitive value or text of an Attribute together with 
   relevant supplementary information. Should not be used if the 
   character string identifies an instance of an Object Class or an 
   object in the real world, in which case the Identifier.  Type 
   should be used."    (05)

Given what Monica said about a "consistent mechanism to type information" and 
the definition, I am guessing that the instances of Code Type are 
"adjectives" and some subset of the things that we (we = a NIST project) call 
ValueTypes (ValueType = a datatype whose identity is only known by its value. 
Numbers, then are ValueTypes, but Code Type doesn't include numbers). I'm 
also guessing that they have in mind a "bespoke datatype" -- Whereas a model 
has whatever you'd like as its UoD, the UoD of a datatype is, in some sense, 
the model itself.     (06)

Whatever the case, I don't think equating Code Type with SymbolicString is 
sufficient, because the definition stipulates: "Should not be used if the 
character string identifies an instance of an Object Class or an object in 
the real world." But SymbolicString can identify a real world object:    (07)

(subclass SymbolicString ContentBearingObject)    (08)

     (instance ?OBJ ContentBearingObject)
     (exists (?THING)
         (represents ?OBJ ?THING)))                 (09)

(subrelation represents refers)
(domain refers 1 Entity)
(domain refers 2 Entity)    (010)

... So that would seem to violate the CCT stipulation.    (011)

I think Code Type is something like SymbolicString AND &%Attribute. That's not 
quite right though: it doesn't restrict the 2nd domain of represents to 
&%Abstract. Which is what I think is needed.    (012)

(documentation attribute "(attribute ?OBJECT ?PROPERTY) means that ?PROPERTY 
is a Attribute of ?OBJECT. For example, (attribute MyLittleRedWagon Red).")    (013)

(instance attribute AsymmetricRelation) 
(subrelation attribute property)
(domain property 1 Entity)
(domain property 2 Attribute)    (014)

(documentation  Attribute "Qualities which we cannot or choose not to reify 
into subclasses of &%Object.")
(subclass Attribute Abstract)
(subclass Abstract Entity)    (015)

(documentation Abstract "Properties or qualities as distinguished from any 
particular embodiment of the properties/qualities in a physical medium. 
Instances of Abstract can be said to exist in the same sense as mathematical 
objects such as sets and relations, but they cannot exist at a particular 
place and time without some physical encoding or embodiment.")    (016)

Best Regards, 
- Peter     (017)

Peter Denno 
National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
Manufacturing System Integration Division, 
100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8260             Tel: +1 301-975-3595 
Gaithersburg, MD, USA 20899-8260             FAX: +1 301-975-4694
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (018)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>