[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Consensus on labeling of relationships?

To: pcmurray2000@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:43:16 -0400
Message-id: <e6e884b2e8beee1329447181a1928e32.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, May 22, 2013 11:08, Phil Murray wrote:    (01)

> [Doug Foxvog]    (02)

>  >> [Phil Murray]    (03)

>  >> If you are representing the meaning of a purchase ("John bought
>  >> a book at books.com."), wouldn't _plays the role of Agent in_
> >> or (perhaps even
>  >> better) _participates as Agent in_ be better than "has_Agent"
>  >> to represent the relationship between John and the statement of
>  >> fact about John's activity?
> [DF]
> > No, that is worse.   There is a buying and a selling agent in the sale.
> > The appropriate role needs to be clarified.  The sale should be
> > reified,
> > and relations specifying what is important(buyer, seller, object whose
> > ownership is transferred, recompense for the sale, location of event,
> > time of event, ...) should be made.    (04)

>  > Note that English differentiates "to sell" from "to buy", "to borrow"
>  > from "to lend", and "to give" from "to receive".  Finnish has a single
>  > infinitive for each, and indicates (through case structure) who is on
>  > the giving and receiving end.    (05)

> [PM]
> That's interesting. Do Finnish-speakers think in more transactional terms
> than English-speakers???    (06)

I don't know, but i've heard several, when speaking English, refer to
"lend[ing] <something> from the library".    (07)

> My example, "John bought a book at books.com." was meant as part of
> a "narrative" [about stuff that someone observed had happened] -- that is,
> I was thinking less about modeling the notion of "transaction" than about
> who initiated the activity. That was my [unspoken, and therefore vague]
> notion of Agent.    (08)

This requires some knowledge about books.com.  In some situations
a seller initiates a sale. [Try walking through a Third-World market;
or consider door-to-door sales people or people who try to sell you
flowers or window cleaning service at a stop light.]
The mapping between between buyer and initiatingAgent and seller
and respondingAgent can go either way.  Either way, it takes two
agents (at least) to complete a sale.  Sure, if the sale is on the internet
one or both agents can create a bot to perform its actions.    (09)

> In this case, it's important to differentiate the role of Agent
> (as a person who initiated an activity)    (010)

Call this role initiatingAgent.    (011)

> from the role of Recipient    (012)

Call this role respondingAgent.    (013)

> (or "source of products sought"?).    (014)

A very broad role, which might include a shop, an aisle or shelf in a
store, a URL, a human being, or something else.    (015)

> I still prefer the notion of Concepts
> "participating as [role] in" the meaning of complex ad hoc statements
> about reality.    (016)

So you would name your relations:
  participating as initiating agent in
  participating as responding agent in
  participating as buyer in
  participating as seller in
instead of the shorter :
   seller(In)    (017)

I prefer the inverse relations, without the "in", fwiw.    (018)

Note that if the role is an argument, then you have a ternary relation    (019)

Or are you reifying the relation instance:    (020)

    There is a relation:
       Its ole is R
       Its role subject is S
       Its role object is O
to mean <S R O>    (021)

> In other resources, the existence and precise specification of the
> transaction may be sufficient ... or even preferable.    (022)

What is needed more than a precise specification of the transaction?
So long as the transaction is reified, more statements about it can
always be made.    (023)

-- doug foxvog    (024)

>      Phil    (025)

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    (026)

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