That seems to be Webster's Dictionary. (01)
River (noun): a natural stream of water of usually considerable volume. (02)
Not sure what your point was though. It certainly avoids the mistake of
defining so many necessary conditions for something to be a river. (03)
Mike (04)
Александр Шкотин wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> I think next generation has possibility to read m-w.com
> <http://m-w.com> formal edition,
> with adjusted formal definitions for advanced human beings, robots
> and agents of sir TBL,
> instead of 10000+ ontologies of http://swoogle.umbc.edu/
>
> Alex
>
> Context:
> This is why I think the Protege model that was shown is mistaken in
> trying to make something (the stretch) a part of the definition of what
> it is to be a river, when that thing is arbitrary and capable of
> infinite varieties of definition. The stretch of a river is not a part
> of the river in the way that a part of a pump is a part of a pump. If
> one were to try to bodge this in some way, one would at least have to
> define a minimum unit in which stretches can be measured. Otherwise,
> like the coastline of Britain, it would be infinite.
>
> So I would suggest that a part of something may or may not be a necceary
> part of the definition of what it is to be that thing. However, one
> should distinguish between arbitrary human descriptions that range over
> a thing, and interconnected parts that are themselves coherent things
> like washers, impellers and the like. I guess this impinges on the
> earlier conversation about systems, in that a river is not a system of
> stretches, whereas a pump is a system of pump parts.
>
> Mike
>
>
> Александр Шкотин wrote:
> >
> > [MB]
> >
> > According to that definition the Okavango is not a river.
> >
> > <AS>
> >
> > I think it's better to ask the author of definition. If you see
> > Okavango as a counterexample.
> >
> > I can do it, but I don't know Okavango;)
> >
> > Anyway there is a chance to make definition better, or to get more
> > about a topographical point of view;)
> >
> > [MB]
> >
> > So it is a good example around the issues. Are stretches really
> "Parts"
> >
> > of a river for example?
> >
> > I guess it's possible to set out too many characteristics of
> something,
> >
> > rather than just those things which, by virtue of being true of an
> >
> > individual, make it a member of that class of thing.
> >
> > <AS>
> >
> > You are right about "characteristics", but parts are very important,
> > and for many artificial (and simple natural) things they give
> definition.
> >
> > This is the case with some mixtures of molecules we buy to eat
> > (sometimes they wrote these parts on the envelope;) and all
> > thechnological things, when we define a thing (or process)
> > independently or as part of.
> >
> > Have a look at definition in "description" field for "pump":
> >
> >
>
>http://rdl.rdlfacade.org/data?info=http%3A%2F%2Frdl.rdlfacade.org%2Fdata%23R20735180747
> >
> >
> > and eliminating unnecessary loops...:
> >
> > "A physical object that is a driven piece of equipment in which
> energy
> > is either constantly or periodically added to an amount of liquid in
> > order to increase the pressure required for the process of moving
> > liquid in determinate direction."
> >
> > Do we have a formal language for this kind of statements? - Yes and
> > not one. For ex. RDF may syntactically "eat" everything, especially
> > with reification technique.
> >
> > Do we have inference rules (may I say "Figures of the
> Syllogism";) for
> > this language to prove this kind of lemma: "Pump P1 cannot lift
> water
> > on 10 meters."?
> >
> > - I don't know. But on my knowledge, DL-reasoner, for ex., has only
> > two services: subsumption checking and to check belongness.
> >
> > Then we need a lot of logical axioms to reduce different kind of
> > inference rules to these two services.
> >
> > Well, in math-logic modus ponens is enough somehow. But it more
> > reminds Sheffer operation.
> >
> > So, where Linguist stops with all broadly used meanings
> discovered and
> > defined, Logician begins clarifying definitions and discovering
> axioms
> > and inference rules.
> >
> > what do you think?
> >
> > But back to "river".
> >
> > for me informal definition as #1a at
> > http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/river
> >
> > " a natural stream of water of usually considerable volume."
> >
> > sound valuable to begin with, but we just should keep in mind that
> > usually informal definitions are overlaped.
> >
> > like with this one (following m-w.com <http://m-w.com/>
> <http://m-w.com <http://m-w.com/>>): brook =
> > creek#2 == "a natural stream of water normally smaller than and
> often
> > tributary to a river"
> >
> > But good news is that a number of sub-definitions about natural
> stream
> > of water is fixed and small;)
> >
> > Alex
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > 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
> <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
> <mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
>
>
> --
> Mike Bennett
> Director
> Hypercube Ltd.
> 89 Worship Street
> London EC2A 2BF
> Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
> Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
> www.hypercube.co.uk <http://www.hypercube.co.uk/>
> Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> <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
> <mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (05)
--
Mike Bennett
Director
Hypercube Ltd.
89 Worship Street
London EC2A 2BF
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
www.hypercube.co.uk
Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068 (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (07)
|