ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Conklin, Don" <don.conklin@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:54:21 -0600
Message-id: <D17FEEBBEC904A4893DAD46D94AE1CC30BFF6A0B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
How about    (01)

        Part isDescribedBy  PartDesignDescription
        PartDesignDescription isPartOf Design  (inverse- Design contains
PartDesignDescription)
        System instantiates Design
        Part isPartOf System (inverse- System contains Part)    (02)

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ron Wheeler
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 10:03 AM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class    (03)

Are we sure that we do not have 2 different things with the same name.    (04)

    part  is_described_by  design
    part  is_instance_of  design    (05)

sound like they refer to tangible things that I might be able to pick up    (06)

and install into an assembly or final product    (07)

    part  is_part_of  design    (08)

sounds like a completely different type of thing. This appears to be a 
sub-design incorporated into a description of a thing. Not tangible 
except in the written (or drawn) form of the concept. Before the first 
drawing is drawn this part exists in the mind of the inventor.    (09)


    piece  is_described_by  design
    piece  is_instance_of  design    (010)

are these equivalent to    (011)

    part  is_described_by  design
    part  is_instance_of  design    (012)

or am I completely misunderstanding the concept here?    (013)

The overloading of the English language is not helpful.    (014)

Ron    (015)

Richard H. McCullough wrote:
> Hi Antoinette
>
>   
> I'm just using a triple-style notation -- subject predicate object
> I should have written the statements like this
>
>     part  is_described_by  design
>     part  is_instance_of  design
>     part  is_part_of  design
>
> Dick McCullough
> Ayn Rand do speak od mKR done;
> mKE do enhance od Real Intelligence done;
> knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
> knowledge haspart proposition list;
> http://mKRmKE.org/
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Antoinette Arsic" <aarsic@xxxxxxxx>
> To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 4:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class
>
>
>   
>> Richard,
>>
>> What in the heck are you talking about? I'm just learning CL and FOL;    (016)

>> other notations like owl, RDF/S, Dewey, Marc, DC, Mods, METS I am
familiar 
>> with. I do this done. Someone do enlighten me done. I do speak thanks    (017)

>> done. ;)
>>
>> SGIS
>> Antoinette Arsic
>> Sr. Systems Engineer
>> 8618 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 100
>> Vienna, VA 22182
>> 703-506-8621
>> 443-567-2703
>> aarsic@xxxxxxxx
>> www.SGIS.com
>> ________________________________________
>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>> [ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard H. 
>> McCullough [rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 6:23 AM
>> To: [ontolog-forum]
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class
>>
>> Sean & Dan
>>
>> It is hard for me to understand what this discussion is about.
>> When I see things like
>>    part is described by design
>> and
>>    part is instance of design
>> I wonder if you are missing the whole concept of
>>    part is part of design
>> i.e., the part-whole relation.
>>
>> In Sean's last email, time dependence is mentioned,
>> and I wonder -- are you now talking about a
>> part-whole relation which is time-varying?
>>
>> Dick McCullough
>> Ayn Rand do speak od mKR done;
>> mKE do enhance od Real Intelligence done;
>> knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
>> knowledge haspart proposition list;
>> http://mKRmKE.org/
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Sean Barker" <sean.barker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 12:25 AM
>> Subject: [ontolog-forum] Fw: Fw: Thing and Class
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Dan,
>>>
>>> While I would agree that, say, the CAD model for a part
>>> describes the shape of a part, the issue is not one of design but of
>>> configuration management. In particular, the criterion for being a
part
>>> A123 is that it is fit, form and function identical to the "typical
>>> part" A123. The design is an "ontological commitment" that some
class of
>>> thing exists (will exist). To reject this is to reject the concept
of
>>> "is-a" and of labelling things with the concepts they instantiate.
>>>
>>> Conversely, penguins do not stop being penguins just because some
has
>>> sequenced their DNA (written down their design).
>>>
>>> The fact that engineering systems are concerned with coming-to-be
and
>>> ceasing-to-be suggests that
>>> engineering ontologies must use a temporal logic. In fact, many
>>> engineering
>>> systems
>>> are based on effectivities and change notices. The first explicitly
>>> identifies what components
>>> make up a product at a particular time or at a point in the product
run,
>>> while th second
>>> controls when the definitions are changed.
>>>
>>> Sean Barker
>>> BAE SYSTEMS - Advanced Technology CentreBristol, UK
>>>
>>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dan
Corwin
>>> Sent: 01 September 2008 19:46
>>> To: [ontolog-forum]
>>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fw: Thing and Class
>>>
>>>
>>>               *** 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.
>>>
>>> No magic here, just typical abstract and concrete objects.
>>>
>>> Sean Barker wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> 2) The product of a design office is designs, instances of the
general
>>>>         
>>>> mathom "design". In the DO, any class/type structure applied to a
set
>>>> of designs is a generalization of the set of design instances -
>>>> designs are
>>>> not classes for anything.
>>>>         
>>> A "design" is surely an object in the world of information.
>>> It describes something, which you portray below as concrete.
>>>
>>>       
>>>> The product of a manufacturing organization is parts, each of
>>>> which is an instance of a design.
>>>>         
>>> Wrong.  Each "part" may be based on the "design", but their
>>> relation is described/describes, not instance/class.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Dan Corwin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>  
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (019)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (020)

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