ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] What is the role of an upper level ontology?

To: <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Matthew West" <dr.matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 09:06:26 +0100
Message-id: <519b2b03.e867b40a.2dae.66ee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Doug,    (01)

> > Take the team/club example.
> > It seems obvious to me that a team member is indeed a mereological
> > part-of the team, at least if we ignore temporal extents (We might
> > have to say, the temporal part of the member during the time interval
> > that the team exists, is part-of the team.)
> 
> Why do you consider the team to have a spatial extent?  I'd resist such a
> model.  Does the team have a mass and a volume?    (02)

MW: Well I sail, and I can confirm that there are occasions when the weight
of the crew has a limit set on it for a class of boat. Interestingly you can
even in some cases have more lighter people or fewer heavier people within
the rules. So I would definitely go for a team having a mereological
relationship to its members. However, there is also the question of roles,
so in a crew, one is the helm, another the tactician, two or more are
grinders, whilst others are trimmers. So that is another kind of
constitution a team has. One does not exclude another.    (03)

Regards    (04)

Matthew West                            
Information  Junction
Tel: +44 1489 880185
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
Skype: dr.matthew.west
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
https://sites.google.com/site/drmatthewwest/
This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England
and Wales No. 6632177. 
Registered office: 8 Ennismore Close, Letchworth Garden City, Hertfordshire,
SG6 2SU.    (05)



> 
> -- doug foxvog
> 
> > It is far less
> > obvious that the team is part-of the club; indeed, that seems like a
> > category mistake. (Does a club have a spatiotemporal extent?) And it
> > is surly not true to say that a club is part-of a federation. I don't
> > see a federation as being a mereological whole. So, part-of is indeed
> > transitive, its is easy to describe, and it has nothing much to do
> > with federations. That all seems pretty obvious to me. Next question?
> >
> > Pat Hayes
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
> > 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
> > Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> > FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
> > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (07)

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