On 11/15/2011 9:31 AM, Phil Murray wrote:
> The issue for me is how to represent exchanges of meaning about current
> (and historical) realities -- that is, exchanges among humans -- in a
> more direct way, without deconstruction into bipartite representations. (01)
That's an excellent goal. For exchanges among humans, Aristotle
developed a notation for ontology that was far superior to anything
that most people have been talking about in this and other forums: (02)
Controlled natural language. (03)
Aristotle's syllogisms are much, much more readable (and writable)
than any popular notation for ontology. And if you look at the
OWL ontologies on the WWW, you'll find that the overwhelming
majority do not use any feature that could not be expressed
in Aristotle's subset. (04)
Following are the slides of a 3-hour tutorial that I presented
in Malaysia in July and with some minor revisions repeated in
Brazil in September: (05)
http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/cnl4onto.pdf
Controlled natural language for ontology (06)
Section 2 (slides 32-48) covers Aristotle and the extensions
by the medieval Scholastics. (07)
John (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 (09)
|