[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] is-part-of: a really, really, bad practice?

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:07:37 -0400
Message-id: <a884ef7f68bbd7504a6620529045bd4e.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Mon, May 27, 2013 23:07, William Frank wrote:    (01)

> as happens often around here, it seems to me we agree more than
> disagree, but are using different language,
> but also seem to disagree about what is
> shiny new and what is old.    (02)

> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 7:43 PM, <jmcclure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:    (03)

>> ...
>> Notionally "predicates" decompose to predicate-verb and -object, the
>> latter being a *Clause* -- a subtype of *Statement.* Thus properties are
>> named only as verbs & prepositions.
>> *Tenseless Amodal Properties.* I'd like to know how you'd model this in
>> RDF triples then    (04)

>> past(Harry believes (John Know Bill))    (05)

>> I know for me it'd be:
>> Person:Harry had [[Belief:That JohnKnowsBill]]    (06)

> For me, this would be more like
> Past (exists B of type Belief, (Harry of type Person, and Harry plays the
> role of believer in B, and Proposition:P plays the role of believed in B,
> and P = (Exists A of type Acquaintanceship such that Person:John plays the
> role of aquainted in A and Person Bill Plays the role of aquainted with in
> A).    (07)

I like this.  I note that in:
>    Harry plays the role of believer in B
"plays the role of ... in" is a ternary predicate with arguments
"Harry", "believer", and "B".    (08)

This technique allows one to replace any domain-specific binary
predicate with a domain independent ternary predicate with
one of the arguments basically specifying what the binary predicate
is.    (09)

If you are morally opposed to domain-specific predicates, that's
fine.  If you are morally opposed to ternary predicates, then its
not fine.    (010)

I suggest that the domain specific predicates are fine within their
domains.  But also, that this technique can be used to translate
such predicates to a different form outside of the domain.    (011)

-- doug foxvog    (012)

> Without all the subject and predicate stuff, so I would guess less
> expensive.
> ...
>> Thanks - jmc
>>...    (013)

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    (014)

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