At 3:17 PM -0600 1/14/08, David Whitten wrote:
>There is an article at http://pingmag.jp/2008/01/11/chindougu/
>about Chindogu. (also see: http://www.chindogu.net/)
>
>The creator of the category (Kenji Kawakami of the
>Chindogu Society of Japan) shares his design criteria
>for these objects:
>
>Chindogu Ten Commandments
>
># 1 A chindogu must not actually be used
># 2 It must have some function.
># 3 It must have an anarchic element.
># 4 It must be a tool for everyday life.
># 5 It must not actually be put on the market.
># 6 It must not be only for the purpose of humor.
># 7 It must not be for black humor.
># 8 "Dirty" jokes are forbidden.
># 9 It must not be for profit.
>#10 It must be usable internationally.
>
>
>This strikes me as a category that could appear in an ontology. (01)
Really? Why? An ontology of what? And even if you are right, wouldn't
it make more sense to focus for a while on more down-to-earth
examples that would be some actual use? (02)
Pat Hayes
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes (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)
|