[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology and methodology: roles

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "John A. Bateman" <bateman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:54:22 +0100
Message-id: <4601471E.90700@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
JohnS:    (01)

> Again, drop the words "role", "filler", "instance", "participating",
> and "instantiated".  Just look at the FOL.    (02)

FOL is fine by me: I recommend
getting hold of the LOA paper and going through this
combined with DOLCE for the
definitions. (We also have a version of DOLCE in CASL
by the way if that helps bridge a gap.)    (03)

> But I also believe that the confusion is based on ambiguities
> in the terms "individual" and "identity criteria".  Those
> words are an open invitation to creating new "individuals"
> and "identities" in very loosely defined circumstances.    (04)

I agree. The goal must be to remove the "loosely defined
circumstances", which is what the paper I cited from LOA
and colleagues attempts to do. When the loosely defined
circumstances are removed, we will no doubt know better
what needs to be counted. Whether or not some of those
end up being called 'individuals' or not is less
interesting.    (05)

But perhaps we need sub-threads, where we
only exchange the FOL of what we are intending to
communicate? (and why limit to FOL, we should probably
include as part of the subject line metainformation
concerning which logic we are using in the post). And
then we could also include information about which
theories we are building on, and which not, and
whether there are any morphisms that we want to throw
in to get from the import to our post. There
are several languages that support this kind
of exchange, one of them is CASL.    (06)

(In fact, we
could start exchanging pieces of structured
ontological specifications.... maybe even doing
some ontology? But perhaps that goes too far.....)    (07)

:-)    (08)

But whether the translation is quite sufficient to:    (09)

> After the translation, either the
> question will disappear or the answer should be clear.    (010)

will be interesting. Seems to suggest that no problems
are left as soon as one has something in FOL plus
some metalanguage.... does not seem to be borne out
much.    (011)

John.    (012)

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    (013)

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