Re: [ontolog-forum] Time representation

[Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>]

At 8:33 PM +0000 1/24/08, Chris Partridge wrote:

> Pat,
> I have cut out some irrelevant
> stuff.

Ditto

> >
> >>I think this is where ontology (as a picture of reality
> comes
> >>in).
> >
> >I don't follow. Why would it come in here more than in
> designing
> >software? Surely you aren't thinking of ontologies as new
> scientific
> >theories (are you??)
>
> There is a long tradition of regarding computer systems as
> theories.

As *scientific* theories?

> I will
> give you the quotes if you wish.
>
> Jonathon Lowe (a philosopher I recall you meeting) has a technical
> definition of ontology as "the set of things whose existence is
> acknowledged
> by a particular theory or system of thought." (E. J. Lowe, The
> Oxford
> Companion to Philosophy)

He is clearly using the word in its philosophical sense, not its IT sense. Nobody in this forum is doing philosophical ontology.

> Taking these two points together, one can
> regards a computer system's
> ontology as (roughly) "the set of things whose existence is
> acknowledged by
> a particular computer system"

Im not sure what that means, but its certainly not ontology as in 'ontology engineering'.

> >>
> >>When we reflected upon this, what we realised is that we had
> tried (and
> >>succeeded to an extent) in capturing the main features of
> corporate
> >actions
> >>- and that the new (unrecognised) situations were just (very)
> unfamiliar
> >>combinations of familiar features.
> >
> >You were lucky!
> >
>
> The issue for us was that this became a regular feature, so it seemed
> to be
> more than luck.

I meant, you were lucky that you only had to go around the knowledge extraction loop once.

> >That seems on the face of it to be
> self-contradictory. Isnt it pretty
> >much the definition of 'unforseen' that one cannot plan for it
> ahead
> >of time, since it is invisible?
> >
>
> I think there is a difference between saying that we can foresee that
> we are
> going to do USD/GBP currency exchanges - and how we plan for that in
> a
> system.
> And saying that the financial markets are volatile, and new
> instruments are
> going to arise (whose details we do not know) - and how we plan for
> that. At
> some level, we are saying that we cannot foresee what is going to
> happen.

Right. So how is it possible to plan for something that you cannot forsee, other than in a general sense trying to stay alert?

> >>One way of doing this is to try and make
> >>the design reflect what is actually happening reasonably
> accurately
> >
> >?? Surely that is exactly what one should not do, in order to be
> able
> >to handle unforseen situations. That strategy will lock in the
> way
> >things are at the time the system is designed, not the way
> that
> >things might become later.
> >
> >>  - one
> >>way of testing this is to see how fruitful the design is.
> >
> >How does one set out to do that? This sounds about as clear as
> >testing a design for 'elegance' or some other unmeasurable
> subjective
> >quality.
>
> I do not understand. The test is reasonably simple and has clear
> results. If
> you want details you can read the book. What is immeasurable or
> subjective
> about it?

I need to read the book, obviously, but I suspect we are at cross purposes. I cannot even imagine what would be a simple test of success at solving an unforseen problem. Unforseen by who, when? Suppose it turns out to be able to do something unforseen, but the designer then tells you they had in fact forseen that and planned for it. Who is to contradict them?

But in any case, why has this got anything much to do with ontology design? Do you feel that ontologies should be designed for unforseen things more than other artifacts?

Pat

-- 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)