[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology, Information Models and the 'Real World': C

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Waclaw Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:09:18 +0200
Message-id: <465BDFAE.5070508@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Waclaw Kusnierczyk wrote:    (01)

...  I guess that    (02)

(ist TemporalContextDay06-16-2006 (that (Dead Osama-Bin-Laden)))    (03)

should be read as (formatted for clarity):    (04)

the proposition which corresponds
   in the context TemporalContextDay06-16-2006
   to the sentence (Dead Osama-Bin-Laden)
is true    (05)

rather than as    (06)

the proposition which corresponds
   to the sentence (Dead Osama-Bin-Laden)
is true
   in the context TemporalContextDay06-16-2006    (07)

This would make sense in the light of the preceding discussion.    (08)

Further in the IKL Guide, I find axioms such as    (09)

(forall (c)(iff (A-clear c)
   (forall (p ...) (iff
     (ist c (AND p ...)))
     (and (ist c p)(ist c (AND ...)))
))    (010)

where 'p' is used to refer to propositions, not sentences, yet there 
still is context-dependence.    (011)

While    (012)

(ist c (that s))    (013)

could be read as above, to assure that it is the sentence, not the 
proposition that is context-dependent, how should    (014)

(ist c p)    (015)

be read?    (016)

vQ    (017)

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    (018)

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