You might look at this recent FOIS 2014 paper, which is still in the early
stages of a more complete ontologization:
Xiaowei Wang, Nicola Guarino, Giancarlo Guizzardi, and John Mylopoulos. 2014.
Towards an Ontology of Software: a Requirements Engineering Perspective. (01)
And the emerging Information Artifact Ontology by the U. Buffalo et al folks:
https://code.google.com/p/information-artifact-ontology/. (02)
Thanks,
Leo (03)
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
>bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Edward Barkmeyer
>Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 1:58 PM
>To: [ontolog-forum]
>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Watchout Watson: Here comes Amazon Machine
>Learning - ZDNet- 2015.04.10
>
>John,
>
>I agree with this:
>> Possibility and necessity affect the logic, not the ontology
>
>I disagree with this in more than one way:
>> They can be treated in the same way as plans for the future.
>> For example, if you're designing an airplane or a bridge, it's a possibility
>until
>it's actually built.
>
>The handling of future things is very much about what the ontological
>commitments are. One "can" treat future things as 'possibilities', by making
>that ontological commitment, but one can also treat them as 'facts' by making
>a different commitment. In a 4D logic, for example, it is entirely acceptable
>to
>provide the time stamp for temporal parts of a thing as future dates and times.
>And it is a common practice in creating business calendars. It is also
>possible to
>treat them as "mental events" a la Davidson. Future is yet another ontological
>can of worms.
>
>My engineering (and semiotics) background objects to your example. The
>design for an aircraft is a design, not an aircraft. The design exists
>independently of its realization. The design itself may undergo state changes,
>which are modeled in various ways, including "versions", which are much more
>common than "temporal parts".
>
>And one can make the same argument about "plans" for future events. The
>"plan" is the "mental event" that conceptualizes the expected event. It can
>exist long before the actual event, which may never come to pass.
>
>In short, this is all about your ontology, and only some ontological choices
>affect the choice of logic.
>
>-Ed
>
>P.S. Confusing a design for a thing with the thing itself is a semiotic error
>-- it is
>ontologically simply wrong. The problem in many engineering disciplines is
>that the design engineers *only* work with designs and prototypes, and they
>use the *terms* for the actual things in describing their design objects. But
>that is a term/denotation practice; and the denotation of the same terms in the
>manufacturing and operations environment is different.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
>bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F Sowa
>Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 8:13 AM
>To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Watchout Watson: Here comes Amazon Machine
>Learning - ZDNet- 2015.04.10
>
>Dear Matthew,
>
>Possibility and necessity affect the logic, not the ontology:
>
>> Another problematic category is possibilia (things that might be, or
>> possibly are in some parallel universe).
>
>They can be treated in the same way as plans for the future.
>For example, if you're designing an airplane or a bridge, it's a possibility
>until
>it's actually built.
>
>> The criteria for including possibilia (or not) is utility vs the
>> baggage that comes with the extra commitment.
>
>The categories of parts, part numbers, etc., might be empty in actuality, but
>they are specified in the ontology by the same methods before and after the
>things are built.
>
>There are, of course, issues about storing information about the future in the
>database -- orders for future delivery of things that don't yet exist,
>reservations
>for hotels, travel, etc.
>The orders and reservations exist in the present (or past), but they refer to
>things and events in the future.
>
>Tom Johnston wrote a book about time and temporal issues in databases.
>Perhaps he might care to comment on this point.
>
>Following is an article in which I discuss issues about modality, possible
>worlds,
>and the laws that govern them:
>
> http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/worlds.pdf
> Worlds, models, and descriptions
>
>And by the way, possibilities are another area where a strictly nominalist
>position (e.g., Quine's or Goodman's) gets into trouble.
>
>Clarence Irving Lewis, who defined the first modern versions of modal logic,
>had been the chair of the philosophy department at Harvard while Quine was a
>student and later a professor.
>
>But Quine was very strongly opposed to any version of modal logic and any talk
>of possibilia. Hao Wang, who had earned a PhD under Quine's supervision, was
>very critical of Quine's attitude. He called it *logical negativism*. See
>
> Wang, Hao (1986) Beyond Analytic Philosophy: Doing Justice
> to What We Know, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
>
>John
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>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
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>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
> (04)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (05)
|