Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS for controlled val

["Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Ali,

 

I’m sure Chris has several kinds of justification for his rude behavior, but I really don’t care much what his vocabulary is if he can’t be civil.  It is usually a waste of energy to try to communicate with him, and I should have known better than to try.  When he has his mind made up, no light enters regardless of the facts.  

 

I use terminology that fits my needs, and though Chris (and apparently you) have subscribed to a specific terminology you are comfortable with, that isn’t the only way people talk about things like this.  If he can’t translate my terminology into his own, then he is the worse for it.  

 

Again, I present the case that all meaning is subjective, terminology is not standard for any such narrow field among the general population, and rudeness is not excusable behavior.  

 

-Rich

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2

---

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ali Hashemi
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 2:05 PM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS for controlled values for controlledvocabulary]

 

Rich,

 

I think the reason that Chris M has taken issue with your posts has been in your use of terminology. This is especially evident via the book you linked to: ( http://www.amazon.com/Unconscious-Infinite-Sets-Bi-logic-Maresfield/dp/1855752026/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1286932010&sr=8-1 ), which is hardly the standard sense in which "Logic" is used. Similarly for Higher Order Logic, it seems you take it to mean (and this is a very coarse interpretation) any system that transcends or is broader than what logicians and most other people refer to as logic.

 

From a didactic point of view, this can be especially confusing for someone who is new to the field. Again, from what I can glean, you are taking words that have been rather well defined and using them in non-standard ways. Now I can put a fairly reasonable interpretation on your use of these words by ignoring the rich history which those words are connected to, and some of what you say does sound reasonable, but I hope you can also appreciate how it can come off as misleading.

 

Now it might be useful while talking to you if someone were to use these phrases as you intend them; but were such a person to then try to converse with almost anyone else in the field - using the terms as you did - they would likely come off as quite ignorant due to their non-standard usage of the terms.

 

I must say, I appreciate Chris comments in clarifying what the standard interpretation of the terms you used actually are. This isn't to say you don't have something valuable to say, just that the phrasing can be highly misleading to and counterproductive for someone who is not well versed in the subject matter - thanks Chris!

 

Best,

Ali

 

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Rich Cooper <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Duane, yes, iterators in software were what I tried to convey there.  There is no function that will iterate the primes.  By pairing each prime in ascending order with any other iterated set, you create unique prime keys for each element of that set, keys that cannot be factored.  

 

Thanks for your inputs,

-Rich

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2

---

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Duane Nickull
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 10:22 PM

To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] HOL decidability [Was: using SKOS for controlled values for controlledvocabulary]

 

On 10/12/10 10:14 PM, "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Iterate means "for each in order" for the ill-iterate.

Of course this depends on the context.  For those of us who actually write code for a living, iterator classes have distinct sets of methods and properties such as “hasNext():boolean” and “indexOf():int”.

Order depends largely on the serialization.  Nevertheless, your arguments resound well.

Duane
---
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

--
www.reseed.ca
www.pinkarmy.org

(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,

_________________________________________________________________
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)