[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] OWL and lack of identifiers

To: sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Ontolog Forum <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Waclaw Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:43:02 +0200
Message-id: <46262066.405@xxxxxxxxxxx>
John,    (01)

I was neither complaining, nor suggesting the situation must be 
repaired;  this was just a side remark.  I am clear that vagueness and 
ambiguity is often an advantage of NL, not a disadvantage.  But, 
perhaps, official specifications should avoid vaguenesses and 
ambiguities for the sake of (almost) logical correctness.  For after 
all, these specifications are to be used to implement dumb, but logical 
software.    (02)

I do not disagree with you on this.    (03)

vQ    (04)

John F. Sowa wrote:
> Wacek,
> That is the kind of technical nicety that causes normal people
> to avoid inviting logicians to social events:
>> It is confusing to say that an XML document is well-formed in the sense 
>> of its conformance to the XML syntax, since:
>> - this way of speaking is suggestive of that there can be a 
>> non-well-formed XML document (where 'well-formed' still refers to the 
>> XML syntax), while
>> - a document that does not conform to the XML syntax simply is not an 
>> XML document.
> There are vast numbers of documents whose authors had hoped
> that they might meet the standards of an "XML document", but
> for one reason or another, there was a syntactic flaw.
> In all natural languages, there are adjectives, sometimes
> called "privative" adjectives, that deprive the noun of some
> attributes it normally has.  Examples include "counterfeit
> money" or "bad grammar" or "poorly formed sentence".
> Such phrases cannot be translated to predicate calculus simply
> by taking a predicate P(x) that represents the adjective and
> another predicate Q(x) that represents the noun and writing
> the conjunction
>    P(x) & Q(x).
> The option of using privative adjectives is a strength of NLs,
> not a weakness.  I suggest that the documentation used for
> formal languages take advantage of that option.  I detest the
> phrase "abuse of language", which some logicians deliberately
> attach to usage which is correct in any NL.
> John    (05)

Wacek Kusnierczyk    (06)

Department of Information and Computer Science (IDI)
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
Sem Saelandsv. 7-9
7027 Trondheim
Norway    (07)

tel.   0047 73591875
fax    0047 73594466
------------------------------------------------------    (08)

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    (09)

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