Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping

["Chris Partridge" <partridge.csj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Agree with Matthew about the 4D stuff.

 

“Interestingly here it is membership that is the root primitive, rather than set or type. Sets have an axiom that says that if two sets have the same membership they are the same set, whereas types do not have that axiom.”

 

Though, as I think John Sowa pointed out in general (apologies if it was someone else), the ‘root primitive’ membership has different senses / meanings in the two cases – so it is not exactly the same.

 

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matthew West
Sent: 04 February 2010 09:29
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping

 

Dear Duane,

 

It is the most basic thing about sets that they are defined by their membership, which does not change. So if you have something that has members, but the membership can change, then what you  know for certain is that it is not a set. Some people use the word type for such things. A type will have, at a point in time, a set which is its membership.

 

One of the attractions to me of 4D with possible worlds is that you do not need types, because 4D essentially makes things timeless and unchanging, and possible worlds allows you  to deal with the intentional.

 

Interestingly here it is membership that is the root primitive, rather than set or type. Sets have an axiom that says that if two sets have the same membership they are the same set, whereas types do not have that axiom.

 

Regards

 

Matthew West                           

Information  Junction

Tel: +44 560 302 3685

Mobile: +44 750 3385279

matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/

http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/

 

This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England and Wales No. 6632177.

Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City, Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.

 

 

 

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane Nickull
Sent: 04 February 2010 06:37
To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx; [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Foundation ontology, CYC, and Mapping

 

Doug:

Can you please clarify what you mean by “Sets are timeless; they cannot change their members”. Do you mean they cannot add new members?  Can they not change enumeration lists of existing members?  Can existing members values be retracted?

D


On 2/3/10 5:47 PM, "doug  foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The definition should start out that a set has members.  Restrictions
on the permissible types of members can identify different types of set,
or in given contexts may limit what is considered to be a generic set.
Sets are timeless; they cannot change members.  If an element which is not
in a set is added to a set, the result is a different set.

---
Adobe LiveCycle Enterprise Architecture - http://www.adobe.com/products/livecycle/
My TV Show - http://tv.adobe.com/show/duanes-world/
My Blog – http://technoracle.blogspot.com/
My Band – http://22ndcenturyofficial.com/
Twitter – http://twitter.com/duanechaos

_________________________________________________________________
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)