Doug, (01)
On 04/10/2012 16:24, doug foxvog wrote:
> On Thu, October 4, 2012 07:00, Gian Piero Zarri wrote:
>
>> ... solutions in the "qua-individuals" style like
>> those proposed by Masolo and Cie. are not only inelegant but, mainly,
>> actually impracticable because they lead to a quick proliferation of
>> individuals: "JOHNquaHarvard-student" becomes, in fact, an instance of a
>> concept like "student". And "student", moreover, is a "transient
>> property" that cannot be instantiated.
> If you only allow the instantiation of rigid classes, then, by definition,
> "student" cannot be instantiated. One can instantiate an instance of
> "person" -- or whatever the nearest subsuming rigid class is -- and
> associate the role "student" with it in the appropriate timeframe.
>
> However, Masolo & Cie do allow the instantiation of non-rigid classes,
> such as "student". Since they DO it, they CAN do it in their system. (02)
This is a sort of casuistry. Apart from the logical mistake of declaring
instances of "student" or "customer", can you imagine a PRACTICAL system
of reasonable dimensions where you are continuously obliged to create
new individuals for specifying all the possible everyday behaviours of
John (and of all the others)? The management of individuals is
particularly tricky and costly in concrete KBs. (03)
Regards, (04)
G.P. Zarri (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|