Hi Ed, (01)
Yes, of course our types are identified by their members. It's an
EXTENSIONAL ontology. That's kinda the definition of an extensional
ontology. Our individuals are identified by their extent also - in this case
spatio-temporal. (02)
I just replied to Rich pointing out that extensional isn't everyone's cup of
tea. Going extensional and using BORO, as we do, means doing some rigorous
and tedious analysis work before committing things to the ontology. As I
said...not everyone's cup of tea. (03)
Cheers
--
Ian (04)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ed Barkmeyer
Sent: 10 February 2009 23:28
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] An Ultra High Level Ontology (05)
Rich Cooper wrote:
> Since John Sowa and Pat Hayes (and possibly Ian Bailey) seem to agree
> on the following ultra high level ontology, perhaps we should proclaim
> it an "Initial Ontic Standard" that can be built upon:
>
> -Thing
> -Individual
> -Type
> -Powertype
> -TupleTyple
> -IndividualType
> -Name
> -NameType
> -tuple (thing, thing, thing, ...etc.)
> -couple (thing, thing)
> -superSubtype (type, type)
> -typeInstance (type, thing)
> -powertypeInstance (powertype, type)
> -nameTypeInstance (nametype, name)
> -namedBy (thing, name)
> -triple (thing, thing, thing)
> -quadruple (thing, thing, thing, thing)
> -quintuple (thing, thing, thing, thing, thing) (06)
I, for one, cannot build anything on this list of terms. In the
immortal words of Haim Kilov, "I won't agree with any statement that
contains undefined terms." (07)
Now, if we had definitions and/or axioms for these terms, we might have
a start at an ontology. (08)
And I don't think my intuition is very good with respect to this
taxonomy. Ian said "types are identified by their members", which is a
surprise. It seems to make Type a "set" or a "collection". I would
have expected that a Type would be identified by its 'characteristics',
i.e., the necessary and sufficient conditions specified by its axioms.
So I don't presume that I understand any of what is listed. (09)
I suggest that we don't judge this book by its cover. (010)
-Ed (011)
"'I'm sure I didn't mean--' Alice was beginning, but the Red Queen
interrupted her impatiently. 'That's just what I complain of!
You SHOULD have meant! What do you suppose is the use of a child
without any meaning?'"
-- Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass" (012)
--
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 (013)
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." (014)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (016)
|