ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] An Ultra High Level Ontology

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Azamat" <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 19:38:51 +0200
Message-id: <00ff01c98c6f$9ac092a0$a104810a@homepc>
Hold with Ed,
But OK at the low level.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Barkmeyer" <edbark@xxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] An Ultra High Level Ontology    (01)


> 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)
> 
> 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."
> 
> Now, if we had definitions and/or axioms for these terms, we might have 
> a start at an ontology.
> 
> 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.
> 
> I suggest that we don't judge this book by its cover.
> 
> -Ed
> 
> "'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"
> 
> -- 
> 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
> 
> "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
>  and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>    (02)

_________________________________________________________________
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    (03)

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