Dear John, (01)
You have to be very careful to qualify what you say here: (02)
> PC> ... the meanings of the terms in the ontology do not depend solely
> > on the total sum of all the inferences derivable from the logic, but
> > on the **intended meanings**, which do or at least should control
> > the way the elements are used in applications.
>
> That is sheer nonsense. If those intended meanings aren't in the
> spec's, they won't get into the machine code. And if the spec's
> aren't precise, different programmers will write incompatible codes,
> which won't be interoperable. (03)
MW: What you say is true for information systems that humans are not part
of. However, that is very few practical information systems. For most
information systems humans are an integral part. For example they enter
data, they read reports, and on that basis they make decisions (not just the
computer). In that case it matters if the humans decide that a field that
the programmer decided should be a name, would actually be used for a
description or the price of something or whatever. (04)
MW: So what you say is only true for fully automated systems. (05)
Regards (06)
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/ (07)
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. (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)
|