Re: [ontolog-forum] Last Call: OWL 2 and rdf:text primitive datatype

["Azamat" <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Pavithra,

 

This is not the issue: to be or not to be for "class" as a class.

The issue is that there are largely two types of models: extensional interpretation (EI) and intensional interpretation (II). 

In EI, every abstract thing (e.g., concept) worth its designation is a set, or class, with assigned extension; like a binary relation is reduced to the set of ordered pairs. Here you deal with hierarchies of collections and aggregates of individuals, which main inference rules of transitivity is under a big question.

 

In II, every abstract thing worth its designation is a property, with assigned intension (key characteristics and conditions or laws). Here you deal with hierarchies of properties or intensions.

The intensional languages are tend to be concise, consistent and comprehensive, while the extensional languages are inlined to be wordy, inconsistent and partial, like OWL 1,2,..., the possible reason why John Bottoms failed to get its last specifications.  

 

A big concern is that most formal ontology languages fall under the group of extensional models, deprecating the rich scope of Meaning to mere extension and referents.

According to the II, the semantics of Meaning is a complex set of meanings; for it includes not only ?extension and referents?, but also ?intension, sense, purport, import, comprehension, and context.?

I?d also wish to see the things as elementary as the extensional proponents wishfully think.

 

Azamat

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Pavithra

To: [ontolog-forum]

Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 6:57 PM

Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Last Call: OWL 2 and rdf:text primitive datatype

John,

 

My intuition tells me that you are trying to create or model  a "Classless society" by wanting to remove usage of terminology " Class" from OWL2.    In my  humble opinion classlessness in a society  helps to create successful people, in turn a successful society without taking class into consideration!    The concept of "Classless Society" is intriguing! 

 

And as you explained,  also because it sounds redundant.

In computer science " a class is a set of objects ".    An object is an abstract representation of real life entity that can be  described by using its compositions or attributes.  It is a conceptual, abstract way of modeling the real world.  The word "Class"  is similar to using  12 objects vs a dozen!   

 

Now lets look at the semantic usage of the word!  Which one sounds correct in the modeling world?

 -  A type of objects ?    - No does not sound correct!

 -  A set of Objects ?   - This kind of sound correct but generic!

  -  A class of Objects ?

 

To me the third one sounds semantically correct!  Because it is predefined!   The definition of "Class"  is predefined and at present provides traceability to implementation of software.

 

However,  if you remove that word,  it would create a gap from modeling to implementation in software world!   One has to address the need to fill that gap! Or map it to usage of the world "SET"...  Adds some complexity in software world!

 

But interesting thought! Just contemplating..

 

Pavithra

 

 

 

 

 

  

--- On Mon, 4/27/09, Mike Bennett <mbennett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Mike Bennett <mbennett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Last Call: OWL 2 and rdf:text primitive datatype
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, April 27, 2009, 10:34 AM

I see that the OWL 2 spec states that "/Classes/ can be understood as
sets of individuals."

I seem to recall that in OWL1, a Class could be understood both as
extensional (a set of individuals) and intensional (a class has a
collection of properties which would define the members of the set, i.e.
all individuals which have those properties are seen as members of that
set - so still effectively a set of individuals, but arived at
differently).

Am I right in assuming that the existence of properties and axioms
provides for intensional definition of classes, so that OWL2 supports
both? I guess I'm stating the obvious there, and the document on
semantics would seem to bear this out. However, that does mean that OWL
Class maps to both intensional Type and extensional Set. Or am I missing
something?

Mike

John F. Sowa wrote:
> Dick,
>
> RHM> I finally understand that Class is the extension set of Concept.
>  > Now, all of the "strange" properties of "Class" are obvious, because
>  > "Class" is just a set.
>
> The word 'class' has created an enormous amount of confusion in computer
> all branches of computer science and related subjects.  The problem is
> caused by three very different definitions of the word:
>
>   1. Cantor used the word 'Menge', which some people translated to
>      English as 'set' and others as 'class'.  Therefore, many people
>      still use the two English words as synonymous.
>
>   2. As a result of the paradox of all sets that are not members of
>      themselves, logicians have used the word 'class' as a supertype
>      that includes sets and other collections that are "too big" to
>      obey all the usual axioms of set theory.
>
>   3. In object-oriented programming systems, people have adopted the
>      word 'class' as a synonym for 'type'.  That is an extremely
>      unfortunate choice of word that should be outlawed.  It creates
>      an immense amount of confusion without any redeeming social value.
>
> The distinction between intension and extension is critical.
> The word 'type' has been well established in English and other
> natural languages for distinguishing different kinds of entities
> by their definitions, not by the sets of existing entities.
> It is also widely used in programming languages and systems for
> entities distinguished by their definitions, independently of
> the sets of existing things of those types.
>
> Since none of the sets used in computer science are so big that we
> have to use the word 'class', there is no reason for anyone to use
> the word 'class' in anything that has to do with computer systems.
>
> Therefore, I suggest that we use two words: 'set' for the extensional
> meaning, and 'type' for the intensional.  The word 'class' in O-O
> systems should be replaced by 'type'.  I realize that it is an uphill
> battle to get people to change the terminology of their programming
> languages.  But I would use the pair of terms 'set' and 'type' for
> all metalevel discussions about such languages and systems.
>
> It is truly unfortunate that OWL has adopted the word 'class'
> instead of 'type'.  However, that is not the only truly unfortunate
> aspect of OWL.  I don't believe that the world should perpetuate
> the decisions frozen into OWL.
>
> John Sowa
>
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
>
>
>   


--
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


_________________________________________________________________
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

---

_________________________________________________________________
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

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)