Kathy, (01)
I'm sorry, I use that term for the hierarchy itself
with the type-subtype relation as the only connector.
I realize that terminology is not common: (02)
JFS> That is why I have recommended a type hierarchy
> with very few axioms as the background skeleton. (03)
KLB> "The background skeleton" of what? (04)
I like to think of an ontology with the tree or
acyclic graph of the types as the skeleton and
other axioms to "flesh it out". (05)
The skeleton changes very little from one application
to another, but the other axioms tend to be replaced
or updated with much greater frequency. (06)
John (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)
|