[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] context, space-time, group hierarchy

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:20:45 -0500
Message-id: <530A2DED.5060304@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Dick and Ed,    (01)

> I assert that using *mKR* solves [EJB's] more serious problems.    (02)

Asserting that mKR solves the problems does not solve them.
An example that shows how mKR notation can be used is just
the first step.  But this skyscraper has many more steps.    (03)

> It is easy to use a context defined elsewhere,
> and to modify the context as needed.    (04)

I admit that you use mKR notation to copy many things from other
sources, and you can modify mKR very easily.  But I agree with Ed:    (05)

> 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.    (06)

Note the word 'formal'.  That requires a precise definition in some
version of logic that enables you to *prove* many important points:    (07)

  1. The formalism has a precisely defined semantics.    (08)

  2. The intended "meaning" in the kn. engineer's head is represented
     in the formalism in a way that is consistent with the intention.    (09)

  3. The inferences derived from the formal statements are also
     consistent with the KE's intentions.    (010)

  4. The new notation handles points #1, #2, and #3 at least as well or
     better than other notations for some critical applications.    (011)

Doing all these things requires a lot of hard work.  But there is a way
to simplify the work:    (012)

  1. Pick some formal logic L that handles points #1, #2, and #3, but
     not in a very convenient or readable way.    (013)

  2. Specify the semantics of mKR by a translation to and from the
     logic L.    (014)

  3. Then show that your examples of mKR can be translated to L and
     that the software that supports L can process them in a way that
     satisfies Ed and other people with similar concerns.    (015)

  4. Finally, show that typical users who don't have a strong background
     in logic can learn and use your notation and tools faster and more
     accurately than they can learn and use the logic L and its tools.    (016)

John    (017)

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    (018)

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