Peter:
Some of us will be working on SOA next week :)
Frank (01)
On Apr 17, 2007, at 1:19 AM, Peter F Brown wrote: (02)
> I'm at the OASIS Annual Symposium in San Diego all this week (I'm
> blogging it at www.XMLbyStealth.net/blog), and I've been very
> impressed with the large number of people here who have been
> following the various threads on this Forum over the past weeks,
> and are looking forward to this community coming up with some real
> answers to many of their very real business problems. I think we've
> set the bar high for next week!
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Cassidy, Patrick J.
> Sent: 16 April 2007 19:57
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology,Information Models and the
> 'Real World': Contexts
>
> John, PatH:
> I have been "loosely" using context as an argument in a
> "holdsInContext" relation, which gives propositions of the form:
> (holdsInContext ?Prop ?Context)
>
> . . . and a proposition that holds in one context does not
> necessarily hold in another.
>
> This is somewhat off the topic of whether an identifier means the
> same
> thing in different contexts (I prefer that they do, and use
> context/namespace prefixes to address clashes).
>
> But I am very concerned about what can be stated about the
> preservation
> of truth between contexts.
> For example, if a "context" is a time interval in the real world, what
> is true in one time interval may not be true in another. However,
> some
> things tend to remain true for long periods of time, such as the
> location of Mount Rushmore; and other things tend to remain true in
> every spatial context (e.g. the number of protons in an oxygen
> nucleus). Has there been any discussion of how to address
> cross-context preservation of truth in a formal manner?
>
> Pat
>
>
> Patrick Cassidy
> CNTR-MITRE
> 260 Industrial Way West
> Eatontown NJ 07724
> Eatontown: 732-578-6340
> Cell: 908-565-4053
> pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>> John F. Sowa
>> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:41 PM
>> To: [ontolog-forum]
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology,Information Models and
>> the 'Real World'
>>
>> Pat,
>>
>> I sympathize with your attitude toward much of the loose talk
>> about contexts:
>>
>>> ... But in normal assertional logic, the quantifiers are the
>>> only such name-binding operators. Of course all these languages
>>> can be rendered down into functors applied to a single binder,
>>> usually lambda.
>>
>> I'm happy with that.
>>
>>> BUt contexts in context logic play a rather different role: in
>>> particular, there is no explicit name binding syntax, only
>> the notion
>>> that a name may (or may not) denote differently when asserted
>>> relative to a context. Contextual assertion is more like inclusion
>>> inside a modal operator than being in a syntactic binding scope.
>>
>> I prefer very simple formal definitions: a "concept" is a node
>> in a conceptual graph, and a "context" is a box into which you put
>> such graphs.
>>
>> They way I represent talk about a dog or a flea or the kitchen sink
>> as a context is straightforward:
>>
>> 1. I use the binding mechanism (such as the existential quantifier)
>> to represent the thing that is called a context (dog, flea, or
>> sink) by a variable x.
>>
>> 2. Then I use the "that" operator of IKL to represent the context
>> box and its nested CGs as a proposition p.
>>
>> 3. Finally, I use a *description* relation (Dscr) to link #1 and
>> #2 by Dscr(x,p).
>>
>> I have never seen any theory of contexts with a coherent set of
>> axioms that cannot be represented (with a considerable increase
>> in clarity) by restating the axioms by the above method (possibly
>> with some additional relations and types, such as Situation or
> World).
>>
>> John
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.4.0/762 - Release Date:
> 15/04/2007 16:22
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.4.0/762 - Release Date:
> 15/04/2007 16:22
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (03)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (04)
|