On 1/17/2011 9:38 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
> Only multiple inheritance modelers would even face that issue in the
> first place. I am not a C++ fan. (01)
People can get into trouble when they define multiple inheritance
because their definitions are not consistent with their hierarchy. (02)
But there is a solution to that problem: let the system generate
the hierarchy dynamically from the definitions. That way they're
guaranteed to be consistent. (03)
Some people complain that with complex definitions such an approach
could be inefficient or undecidable. But there are simple answers: (04)
1. The great bulk of most hierarchies can be computed very quickly. (05)
2. Those fine placements that may be too complex to compute are
usually of minimal value or usefulness. (06)
3. In any case, the automatically generated hierarchies are
generally far superior to any generated by mere humans. (07)
For examples of how FCA (Formal Concept Analysis) generates
hierarchies automatically, try typing some words to see the
little lattices for words in Roget's Thesaurus: (08)
http://www.ketlab.org.uk/roget.html (09)
And in WordNet: (010)
http://www.ketlab.org.uk/wordnet.html (011)
For comparisons, open both web pages in adjacent windows and type
the same word into each. (012)
Some suggested words: explore, test, happy, love (013)
Question for Azamat: Can you discern any fundamental universal
principles for these classifications? (014)
John (015)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (016)
|