Dear Chris, (01)
I've been away for a week at an ISO meeting working on ISO 15926,
so I've found it difficult to keep up with things here, so unless
its my imagination I think we had an exchange after your note
below when you said that the data models in CL were really data
models of the syntax, not of the underlying logic (or that's how
I understood you). (02)
That is a shame, because I do have some questions that I consider
to be ontological questions about CL (or pretty much any other
logic). Perhaps you can help? (03)
What is a variable?
What is a free variable?
What is a universal variable?
What is an existential variable?
What is a proposition?
What is an assertion? (04)
Regards (05)
Matthew (06)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Christopher
> Menzel
> Sent: 23 October 2006 23:57
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology and Databases
>
>
> > Well I think this is only part of what you need to look at. Logic
> > based ontology languages have elements that are both classes and
> > instances.
>
> Well, they *can* have such objects, but they needn't.
>
> > Apart from that, and looking at what Chris mentions below, my
> > experience is that different languages have different capabilities
> > and limitations, and you need to first of all look at the
> limitations
> > in your source format, and try to make sure when you translate, not
> > to introduce the unintended limiations from the first language in
> > the second.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Matthew
> >
> > PS. Note to Chris on contradictions:
> >
> > Data models are ontologies
> > Common Logic has a Data Model
> > Therefore Common logic is NOT an ontology???
>
> Well, CL is a specification of a class of logical languages, so I
> guess you might say that it is (or at least could be
> presented as) an
> ontology of that class. I'm afraid I'm not sure what you mean by
> CL's data model.
>
> As for CL dialects themselves, none of them is an ontology except in
> the most attenuated sense, since the only axioms that are "built in"
> to a CL dialect are purely general, logical truths like "for any x
> and any P, if x has P, then something has P" which are presumably
> true in *any* ontology.
>
> -chris
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)
|