Matthew West wrote: (01)
> [MW] I can help here. This is the classical mereological whole part
> relation. (02)
Good. That is a definition. My recollection is that 'classical
mereology' is based on a common set of axioms (4) and then certain
additional axioms that are optional and define sub-concepts. (03)
And to Rich Cooper:
> [MW] But you don't know what the concepts actually mean until you have the
> axioms... (04)
That was precisely my point. The token 'wholePart' means nothing. (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)
|