Rich Cooper wrote:
> Adding Ian's extra category:
>
> -wholePart (individual,individual)
>
> to my previous email suggesting an ultra high level ontology basis,
> see the modified ontology below. (01)
Does anyone know what wholePart means? (02)
As I recall, some published paper on Whole-Part relationships identified
22 possible axioms (although many of them require a 4D universe to have
meaning). So wholePart is a category of relations that have exactly
which axioms in common? Are they all antisymmetric? are they all
transitive? are they 'perdurant'? Etc. (03)
I don't doubt that the specification at least tries to define these
things carefully. I do doubt that its definitions are axiomatic. But
we are ill-advised to judge anything from a list of indented terms. (04)
(And Ian must be careful how much he publishes to this group, because
such publication has the potential for violation of ISO copyright.) (05)
-Ed (06)
--
Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694 (07)
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)
|