Dick,
It seems to me that:
> Every proposition has a context that defines the terms and assumptions of the proposition.
Could be written:
Every proposition is part of an ontology/theory that defines the terms in the proposition and the axioms that surround it.
Similarly:
> The context may be expressed as a list of propositions.
> context name :: { defining proposition list };
> at context name { proposition list };
may be written :
(IF (AND <defining proposition list> )
(AND <proposition list> ))
which is only to say that the proposition list in context is just another proposition.
What you are proposing is then strictly a notational difference, presumably based on the possible languages in which {proposition-list} may be written.
Which leads to the real issue:
The more serious problems with ‘context’ (as most of us understand it) are:
a) the knowledge engineer does not know
exactly what the ‘context’ is, and
b) if s/he does, s/he may not have a notation in which it can be formally captured.
-Ed
--
Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Work: +1 301-975-3528![]()
+1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 Mobile: +1 240-672-5800![]()
+1 240-672-5800
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Richard H. McCullough
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:49 AM
To: [ontolog-forum]
Cc: Adam Pease; Brian Riley; Richard S. Latimer
Subject: [ontolog-forum] context, space-time, group hierarchy
I hope that this brief note will clarify a few key ideas that I have discussed previously.
1. context
Every proposition has a context that defines the terms and assumptions of the proposition.
The context may be expressed as a list of propositions.
context name :: { defining proposition list };
at context name { proposition list };
2. space-time
Propositions may describe actions which cause changes over space-time.
Therefore context must include space, time component.
3. group hierarchy
Some propositions describe a group hierarchy, and it is useful to separate the
hierarchy propositions from the other propositions.
There are two interesting types of groups in use today
Class
Rand concept
I mistakenly believed that Rand concepts were appropriate for RDF, OWL, CycL.
I need to revise all my knowledge bases to use Class instead.
Briefly stated, we may say that
Class is group of individuals with 0 or more members
Rand concept is group of individuals with 2 or more members,
similar characteristics
Ayn Rand required 2 or more members to distinguish between abstract groups
and concrete individuals. Class does not make this distinction.
Dick McCullough
Context Knowledge Systems
mKE and the mKR language
mKR/mKE tutorial