ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Why most classifications are fuzzy

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Chris Partridge <partridge.csj@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 18:56:03 +0100
Message-id: <007e01cc3ccf$24b6d340$6e2479c0$@googlemail.com>
Ummm. To me the most real thing is the process of making the
agreement/promise/contract and the intentionality that creates the
obligations. It's what we can see happening.    (01)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Bennett
> Sent: 07 July 2011 18:35
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Why most classifications are fuzzy
> 
> Exactly. The most real "Thing" is the obligations, rights and other
> agreements in the Contract, but the contract itself is merely an
"Instrument".
> 
> This is a good use of the word instrument (and is used in the financial
> industry all the time), since as you say, it is your means, your
instrument, to
> enforce your rights as agreed to in the contract.
> 
> Of course some contracts are not written, but are implied in a
transaction.
> Statute helps with that.
> 
> Rights, as a thing, are brought into being either by contract, by law or
by
> jurisdiction, with a clear level of precedence between these (not all
rights
> defined in a contract need prove to be enforceable when challenged in a
> court of law, since they may be over-ridden by statute). The reciprocal of
the
> Rights of one party, is the Obligations of the other.
> 
> Mike
> 
> On 07/07/2011 18:20, Dave McComb wrote:
> > My understanding is that if you have a contract that must be reduced to
> writing to be enforceable per the Statute of Frauds (which isn't so much
> about fraud but about what has to be written to be enforceable) and if
both
> parties destroy the paper in their vaults, then I'd say the contract is
gone.
> >
> > But of course if you destroy yours and the other guy doesn't you're out
of
> luck.
> >
> > My take is the contract is the mutual obligations (not the paper) but
you
> may need paper to enforce your rights.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Bennett
> > Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 11:13 AM
> > To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; [ontolog-forum]
> > Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Why most classifications are fuzzy
> >
> > Very good point. What's in the vault (or on a record at the
> > custodian) is just a record of the contract. In fact it would be
> > more correct to say that what's real is the rights and
> > obligations defined in the contract, with the contract itself
> > merely an instrument for these. And of course there are contracts
> > implicit in transactions, which may or may not be formalised
> > later by a written contract in some form.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On 07/07/2011 18:01, Chris Partridge wrote:
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> Is the paper in the vault the contract - or the record of the contract?
> >> So, for example, if you destroy the paper, does the law say you have
> >> destroyed the contract?
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> >>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Bennett
> >>> Sent: 07 July 2011 17:37
> >>> To: [ontolog-forum]
> >>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Why most classifications are fuzzy
> >>>
> >>> David,
> >>>
> >>> There is no problem describing financial products ontologically.
> >>> Calipers are not a requirement. All financial products are contracts,
and
> >>> contracts are a real thing regardless of whether they consist of paper
in
> >> a
> >>> vault (as a few still do) or are maintained electronically.
> >>>
> >>> If you don't think contracts are real, try breaking one :)
> >>>
> >>> The dimensions along which they are defined are, as you rightly
suggest,
> >>> where it gets interesting. One look at the ISO 10962 Classification of
> >> Financial
> >>> Instruments standard will show what a challenge it is to try and
> >> articificially
> >>> shoe-horn the whole lot into one dimension - you simply can't.
> >>>
> >>> Mike
> >>>
> >>> On 07/07/2011 16:21, David Eddy wrote:
> >>>> John -
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2011-07-06, at 12:45 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> And a warning:  Unless you can find an immutable law of nature that
> >>>>> creates a classification, don't expect it to be a solid foundation
> >>>>> for a "standard ontology".
> >>>> Agreed.
> >>>>
> >>>> My view of (imagined) reality has been largely financial services
> >>>> (e.g. mutual funds, brokerage, banking,&    various forms of
insurance).
> >>>> In my career, I have only worked directly for a single firm that
> >>>> actually made a physical product (junk jewelry)...
> >>>> otherwise everything has been paper pushing, describing various
facets
> >>>> of non-dimensional products.
> >>>>
> >>>> Quite naturally, since these industries are all conjured out of thin
> >>>> air, there are no natural laws to impose organizational discipline.
> >>>>
> >>>>     From what I've seen, "organization" is largely the last minute
panic
> >>>> to make the next deadline.  Does tend to leave a chaotic residue
which
> >>>> only gets worse over time.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Since this ontology interest has arisen, it has been rattling around
> >>>> in the back of my mind if ontologies can be applied to things like
> >>>> financial "products."
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Personally I vacillate between describing financial "products" as
> >>>> either "non-dimensional" or "N-dimensional."  In any case these
> >>>> products are stuff that cannot be put on a scale&    weighted or have
a
> >>>> caliper applied to them.  It's just information which as far as I
know
> >>>> we have no idea how to measure other than silly things like "lines of
> >>>> code."
> >>>>
> >>>> ___________________
> >>>> David Eddy
> >>>> deddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> ________________________________________________________________
> >>> _
> >>>> 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
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Mike Bennett
> >>> Director
> >>> Hypercube Ltd.
> >>> 89 Worship Street
> >>> London EC2A 2BF
> >>> Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
> >>> Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
> >>> www.hypercube.co.uk
> >>> Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> ________________________________________________________________
> >>> _
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>
> ________________________________________________________________
> _
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Mike Bennett
> Director
> Hypercube Ltd.
> 89 Worship Street
> London EC2A 2BF
> Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
> Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
> www.hypercube.co.uk
> Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________
> _
> 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
>     (02)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (03)

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