This mail is publicly posted to a distribution list as part of a
process of public discussion, any automatically generated statements to the
contrary non-withstanding. It is the opinion of the author, and does not
represent an official company view.
Pat, Jeffery
I was using the principle (from
linear vector spaces) that a dimension is an independent specifier, and so
would describe a pointing finger as a five dimensional object in a 3D space. The
point here being, not whether to use a 3 or 4 D ontology, but
what actually is meant by dimension.
Sean Barker
BAE SYSTEMS - Advanced Technology
Centre
Bristol, UK
+44(0) 117 302 8184
BAE Systems (Operations)
Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace
Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales
No: 1996687
*** WARNING ***
This mail
has originated outside your organization,
either from an external
partner or the Global Internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this
message.
|
At 3:25 PM +0000 3/13/08, Barker, Sean (UK) wrote:
This mail is publicly posted
to a distribution list as part of a process of public discussion, any
automatically generated statements to the contrary non-withstanding. It is
the opinion of the author, and does not represent an official company
view.
A
wide variety of schedules depend on two independent variables - e.g. change
oil every 10,000 miles or six months - so do we need a 5-D
system?
No, these are the same dimension. What makes this tricky is the
"or" in there.
Pat
Sean Barker
BAE SYSTEMS -
Advanced Technology Centre
Bristol, UK
+44(0) 117 302 8184
BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87,
Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered
in England & Wales No: 1996687
From:
ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat
Hayes
Sent: 13 March 2008 14:58
To:
[ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology similarity
and accurate communication
I'd like to hear any arguments to the
contrary, but I doubt that
a strong case can be made that a 4D
ontology is a requirement for
those
applications.
Probably not for simple schedules, indeed. But for a
maintenance scheduler you might well need it, when parts need to be
checked according to the time they have have been in actual use, for
example. Im sure Matthew has examples.
********************************************************************
This
email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and
may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please
delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it
or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any
other
person.
********************************************************************
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us
http://www.flickr.com/pathayes/collections
_________________________________________________________________
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)
|