ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Plural taxonomies?

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Deborah MacPherson <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "MacPherson, Deborah" <dmacpherson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 14:52:24 -0500
Message-id: <B03C4507-E271-478C-97BE-4A3186B1409B@xxxxxxx>

On May 28, 2010, at 3:35 PM, Deborah MacPherson wrote:

Dear Ontolog Forum

 

Since last July I've been talking with the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) Business Architecture Committee (NBAC) about facilities information, and looking at NIEM documentation in more detail to figure out what needs to be done with facility classes and xml schemas for re-use outside the building industry.  Currently, NBAC is looking at the upcoming Information Exchange Model (IEM) Specification. An appendix lists definitions for IEM Artifacts, the following definition is used for Ontology

 

"A conceptual data model that represents relationships and rules among nodes in taxonomy"

 

Please temporarily disregard previous conversations on this forum about appropriate definitions for ontology - this seems to be OK for purposes of this exchange model - even if it may not be correct for other purposes.

No, I am sorry, this is not adequate for anyone or for any purpose. It is just flat WRONG, and wrong in a pernicious and harmful way. It embodies the terrible, destructive error known as confusing use and mention. The relationships described by an ontology are not between nodes in a taxonomy. They are between the THINGS that such nodes REFER TO. An ontology of buildings talks about buildings, not about building-nodes. 

Grammar is irrelevant at this point, frankly. It is like arguing about what color to paint a car that has just been driven over a cliff.

Pat Hayes


However, grammatically there seems to be a problem with what is singular and what is plural

 

·         A conceptual data model
·         represents
·         relationships and rules
·         nodes
·         taxonomy

 

My inclination is this should say "a" taxonomy. But that is why I'm writing, would it be more conceptually and technically correct to say "multiple" or "related" or "a set of" taxonomies? Feedback would be appreciated on exactly how this short definition should be written accurately. Also, the definition does need to stay very short

Thank you

 

Deborah MacPherson


--
********************************************************

Deborah L. MacPherson CSI CCS, AIA
Specifications and Research Cannon Design
Projects Director, Accuracy&Aesthetics

********************************************************

_________________________________________________________________
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

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes





_________________________________________________________________
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)

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