Is this granular enough? Is the parts lifecycle linked explicitly to the
assembly or does it exist on it's own (UML aggregation vs composition).
Aus mein Blackberry/from my Blackberry (01)
----- Original Message -----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: [ontolog-forum] <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri Sep 05 08:23:09 2008
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class (02)
This is not as simple as it may seem. Recommend you keep to: (03)
Part isPartOf Assembly, and its reverse, along with (04)
Part isDescribedBy PartDesignDescription
PartDesignDescription isPartOf Design (inverse- Design contains
PartDesignDescription)
System instantiates Design (05)
An assembly is usually also a System, whether or not it is looked at in
that way. (06)
A functioning System may the highlest level assembly, and often is, but
a System may be implemented as a set of cooperating, physically distinct
parts or assemblies that act in coordination from multiple different
locations and is not therefore one assembly. (07)
A part is the lowest level in an assembly. Some parts are of course
assemblies in their own right, but it depends on point of view. If an
assembled part is purchased as a ready-to-use completed assembly, a
using organization's bill of material will often not reflect that
breakdown (because for them it is a remove-and-replace item), while the
part supplier's internal design and manufacturing information systems
will necessarily show that breakdown because they have to make it. (08)
Note: IEEE standards project P1175.4 is currently working on a
developing a standardized set of concepts for linking assembly and part
structures to system behaviors. If you might have an interest in
working to refine those concepts into practical ontologies / data
structures for describing all these kinds of interrelationships, the
goal of upcoming project P1175.5, please let me know. (09)
Regards,
Peter
_________________________
Peter Eirich
Principal Professional Staff
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
11100 Johns Hopkins Road
Laurel, MD 20723-6099
240-228-7264
(fax) 240-228-5910
peter.eirich@xxxxxxxxxx (010)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Conklin,
Don
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 10:54 AM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Thing and Class (011)
How about (012)
Part isDescribedBy PartDesignDescription
PartDesignDescription isPartOf Design (inverse- Design contains
PartDesignDescription)
System instantiates Design
Part isPartOf System (inverse- System contains Part) (013)
-----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 (014)
Are we sure that we do not have 2 different things with the same name. (015)
part is_described_by design
part is_instance_of design (016)
sound like they refer to tangible things that I might be able to pick up (017)
and install into an assembly or final product (018)
part is_part_of design (019)
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. (020)
piece is_described_by design
piece is_instance_of design (021)
are these equivalent to (022)
part is_described_by design
part is_instance_of design (023)
or am I completely misunderstanding the concept here? (024)
The overloading of the English language is not helpful. (025)
Ron (026)
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 (027)
> 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; (028)
>> 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 (029)
>> 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 (030)
>>> 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 (031)
>>>> is an instance of a design.
>>>>
>>> Wrong. Each "part" may be based on the "design", but their relation (032)
>>> 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
>
>
> (033)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (034)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (035)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (036)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (037)
|