Re: [ontology-summit] ontology-summit Digest, Vol 34, Issue 24

[Antoinette Arsic <aarsic@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Late for me to jump in, I know, but I like the idea of the pump as a role. However, it is still a pump - that is its function as well, if you will. An actor plays the role of Hamlet, but the character of Hamlet is still a man. The actor is a man. Hamlet would not exist without the actor - the man. So, while a pump, or P101, is playing the role of a pump no matter what part number is assigned to it by whichever party, it is also a thing defined as a pump.

Antoinette Arsic
Have a great day!

---

From: ontology-summit-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2012 4:58:59 AM
Subject: ontology-summit Digest, Vol 34, Issue 24

Send ontology-summit mailing list submissions to
        ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        ontology-summit-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You can reach the person managing the list at
        ontology-summit-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ontology-summit digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: System Components (Jack Ring)
   2. Re: System Components (doug  foxvog)
   3. Re: System Components (Chris Partridge)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 00:04:32 -0700
From: Jack Ring <jring7@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] System Components
To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <F7E154BD-1461-4109-A1EE-E42885A6AD20@xxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Seem to me a pig is a pig that may fill the role of "doorstopric"
On Feb 1, 2012, at 9:08 PM, Cory Casanave wrote:

> +1 for roles!
>
> Try this one - is a pig a doorstop?  It is if it is holding open a door.  The role and the "thing" may have very different descriptions yet describe different aspects of the same individual.  The same thing could even be playing multiple roles or the same role in different context.
>
> Don't know why I like the pig thing, just always makes me smile!
>
> If 101 and S3556 were not both so related by name and "intended use" we would never confuse the role and the thing.  So perhaps S3556 could be a doorstop as well!  But pigs make poor pumps.  The difference is another concept that makes for challenging formalization - capability.
>
> Perhaps a first-class concept of roles is missing from our toolbox?
>
> -Cory
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 9:32 PM
> To: Matthew West
> Cc: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] System Components
>
> Very good question, Matthew. Let me try out an idea on you. Your P101 is actually a role played by a pump, rather than a pump itself. Think of it as being like Hamlet, as played by Lawrence Olivier (P101 as played by S3556). You can change actors, and Hamlet is still Hamlet - same role - and while Olivier is playing the role, he *is* Hamlet, at least in a sense. But this second "is" cannot be identity, since you can kick the actor, but you can't kick a role.
>
> Both a pump and a pump-role are spatiotemporal entities, but they have different identity conditions. The identity of a pump, like any other physical object, is determined by the disposition of pieces of material stuff (metal, plastic, rubber), but the identity of  the role is determined by its interfaces to the rest of the system (being connected to this pipe in this place and operated by this controller, etc..)
>
> You can identify a pump-phase (temporal slice) with a pump-role-phase, but you must not identify the actual individuals, so its safer to actually have a relation of 'functioning as' of the like to attach a role-playing thing to its role. Or, you can treat the role as a time-dependent property of the physical thing, but you will probably need a CL-style ability to have properties of properties if you go that (elegant) route.
>
> Make sense?
>
> Pat
>
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:48 AM, Matthew West wrote:
>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> Last Thursday I complained that most ontologies do not give adequate
>> treatment to what I call system components, and if ontology is going
>> to gain traction within the systems world, it needs to get a better
>> understanding of this central idea in systems engineering.
>>
>> I illustrated the issue by telling the (simplified) life story of a
>> system
>> component: the pump, P101, at the bottom of a distillation column.
>> Here is its story.
>>
>> The designer creates a drawing of the distillation column including at
>> the bottom of the column a pump to pump away the column bottoms. He
>> labels it P101, decides that one pump will be sufficient, and gives
>> the specification for the pump in terms of Net Positive Suction Head,
>> differential head, flow rate, materials of construction, and many other things.
>>
>> The construction engineer picks up the drawing and specification and
>> notices he has to install a pump as P101. Fortunately, he has a pump
>> in stock from a previous project, that has been in stores unused for 5
>> years which exactly meets the specification. On it is stamped Serial No S3556.
>>
>> The designer and the Operator comes to see the pump be installed, and
>> once the connections are made, he gives the pump a friendly kick and
>> says to the construction engineer "It's good to see P101 realized at
>> last". The construction engineer says in return "Yes, and it's good to
>> get S3556 off my hands at last." He turns to the operator and says
>> "Why don't we change your drawings to show S3556 instead of P101?" The
>> operator says "No, don't do that, it's a replaceable part, and one day
>> another pump will be put there, and I don't want to have to change all
>> the drawings and other documentation that refers to P101 each time it
>> is replaced, as far as I am concerned it's the same pump whatever is installed there."
>>
>> Some time later the pump breaks down and needs to be taken back to the
>> workshop. The maintenance engineer says to the operator "Hi, can I
>> take
>> S3556 installed as P101 back to the workshop?" The operator replies
>> "Sure, but what am I supposed to do without my P101? If it does not
>> exist I cannot operate my distillation column." The maintenance
>> engineer responds, "I understand. We have another pump S4567, that
>> meets the same specification as P101. We'll replace S3556 with it and
>> you will only be without P101 for a few hours. I don't understand how
>> you can continue to call it P101 though when all the parts have
>> changed at once." The operator replies "I don't care about that. What
>> I care about is what is connected in my system to pump the liquid from
>> the bottom of the column. As long as it does that, it is P101 to me."
>>
>> Later the distillation column is demolished. The operator says, "A sad
>> end, I was very fond of P101, but it is no more." The demolition
>> engineer says, "Yes indeed. Fortunately, we can take S4567 and use it on another plant."
>>
>> It's probably worth summarising the key characteristics of a system
>> component:
>> - It comes into existence the first time it is installed.
>> - It is identical to the equipment items installed, whilst they are
>> installed (but not before or after).
>> - It can survive complete replacement of all its parts at once.
>> - It can survive periods of non-existence.
>> - It ceases to exist when the system it is a component of ceases to exist.
>>
>> This is clearly rather different from the life of ordinary physical objects.
>> However, relatively few ontologies recognise that such things exist.
>> Many try to fob system components off as being classes, or abstract
>> individuals, though these clearly do not have the required characteristics.
>>
>> Ontologists need to step up to the mark here and provide proper
>> recognition for system components.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Matthew West                            
>> Information  Junction
>> Tel: +44 1489 880185
>> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
>> Skype: dr.matthew.west
>> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
>> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>>
>> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>> England and Wales No. 6632177.
>> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
>> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/  
>> Subscribe/Config:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
>> Community Wiki:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973  
> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/  
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/  
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:25:35 -0500
From: "doug  foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] System Components
To: "Ontology Summit 2012 discussion"
        <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
        <e889bbadc68560730d7a96e496a0995c.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1

> Pat,
> Makes sense to me.
> May we include an attribute on role signfying effect-iveness? Role
> effectiveness will partially depend on actor (if you have ever seen Peter
> Sellers play Hamlet).
> Jack

Ontologize the role playing as an object in its own right -- a Situation.
This would be a Davidsonian approach. Then you could make whatever
assertions about it are needed.

This could be done something like this:
  Define the specification and its roles:
  (isa Spec20384720873 PhysicalSystemSpecification)
  <properties of this spec>

  (isa Spec20384720873_RoleP101 RoleInPhysicalSystemSpecification)
  <properties of this role>
  <other roles of this spec>

  Define the part:
  (isa S3556 Pump)
  <properties of S3556>

  Define the part playing the role situation:
  (isa P101PlayedByS3556 PartRoleInPhysicalSystemSituation)
  (startsDuring P101PlayedByS3556 <date-1>)
  (endsDuring P101PlayedByS3556  <date-2>)
  (rolePlayerInRolePlayingSituation
                              P101PlayedByS3556
                              Spec20384720873)
  (roleInSpecification Spec20384720873_RoleP101
                              Spec20384720873)

-- doug

> On Feb 1, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>
>> Very good question, Matthew. Let me try out an idea on you. Your P101 is
>> actually a role played by a pump, rather than a pump itself. Think of it
>> as being like Hamlet, as played by Lawrence Olivier (P101 as played by
>> S3556). You can change actors, and Hamlet is still Hamlet - same role -
>> and while Olivier is playing the role, he *is* Hamlet, at least in a
>> sense. But this second "is" cannot be identity, since you can kick the
>> actor, but you can't kick a role.
>>
>> Both a pump and a pump-role are spatiotemporal entities, but they have
>> different identity conditions. The identity of a pump, like any other
>> physical object, is determined by the disposition of pieces of material
>> stuff (metal, plastic, rubber), but the identity of  the role is
>> determined by its interfaces to the rest of the system (being connected
>> to this pipe in this place and operated by this controller, etc..)
>>
>> You can identify a pump-phase (temporal slice) with a pump-role-phase,
>> but you must not identify the actual individuals, so its safer to
>> actually have a relation of 'functioning as' of the like to attach a
>> role-playing thing to its role. Or, you can treat the role as a
>> time-dependent property of the physical thing, but you will probably
>> need a CL-style ability to have properties of properties if you go that
>> (elegant) route.
>>
>> Make sense?
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:48 AM, Matthew West wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>>
>>> Last Thursday I complained that most ontologies do not give adequate
>>> treatment to what I call system components, and if ontology is going to
>>> gain
>>> traction within the systems world, it needs to get a better
>>> understanding of
>>> this central idea in systems engineering.
>>>
>>> I illustrated the issue by telling the (simplified) life story of a
>>> system
>>> component: the pump, P101, at the bottom of a distillation column. Here
>>> is
>>> its story.
>>>
>>> The designer creates a drawing of the distillation column including at
>>> the
>>> bottom of the column a pump to pump away the column bottoms. He labels
>>> it
>>> P101, decides that one pump will be sufficient, and gives the
>>> specification
>>> for the pump in terms of Net Positive Suction Head, differential head,
>>> flow
>>> rate, materials of construction, and many other things.
>>>
>>> The construction engineer picks up the drawing and specification and
>>> notices
>>> he has to install a pump as P101. Fortunately, he has a pump in stock
>>> from a
>>> previous project, that has been in stores unused for 5 years which
>>> exactly
>>> meets the specification. On it is stamped Serial No S3556.
>>>
>>> The designer and the Operator comes to see the pump be installed, and
>>> once
>>> the connections are made, he gives the pump a friendly kick and says to
>>> the
>>> construction engineer "It's good to see P101 realized at last". The
>>> construction engineer says in return "Yes, and it's good to get S3556
>>> off my
>>> hands at last." He turns to the operator and says "Why don't we change
>>> your
>>> drawings to show S3556 instead of P101?" The operator says "No, don't
>>> do
>>> that, it's a replaceable part, and one day another pump will be put
>>> there,
>>> and I don't want to have to change all the drawings and other
>>> documentation
>>> that refers to P101 each time it is replaced, as far as I am concerned
>>> it's
>>> the same pump whatever is installed there."
>>>
>>> Some time later the pump breaks down and needs to be taken back to the
>>> workshop. The maintenance engineer says to the operator "Hi, can I take
>>> S3556 installed as P101 back to the workshop?" The operator replies
>>> "Sure,
>>> but what am I supposed to do without my P101? If it does not exist I
>>> cannot
>>> operate my distillation column." The maintenance engineer responds, "I
>>> understand. We have another pump S4567, that meets the same
>>> specification as
>>> P101. We'll replace S3556 with it and you will only be without P101 for
>>> a
>>> few hours. I don't understand how you can continue to call it P101
>>> though
>>> when all the parts have changed at once." The operator replies "I don't
>>> care
>>> about that. What I care about is what is connected in my system to pump
>>> the
>>> liquid from the bottom of the column. As long as it does that, it is
>>> P101 to
>>> me."
>>>
>>> Later the distillation column is demolished. The operator says, "A sad
>>> end,
>>> I was very fond of P101, but it is no more." The demolition engineer
>>> says,
>>> "Yes indeed. Fortunately, we can take S4567 and use it on another
>>> plant."
>>>
>>> It's probably worth summarising the key characteristics of a system
>>> component:
>>> - It comes into existence the first time it is installed.
>>> - It is identical to the equipment items installed, whilst they are
>>> installed (but not before or after).
>>> - It can survive complete replacement of all its parts at once.
>>> - It can survive periods of non-existence.
>>> - It ceases to exist when the system it is a component of ceases to
>>> exist.
>>>
>>> This is clearly rather different from the life of ordinary physical
>>> objects.
>>> However, relatively few ontologies recognise that such things exist.
>>> Many
>>> try to fob system components off as being classes, or abstract
>>> individuals,
>>> though these clearly do not have the required characteristics.
>>>
>>> Ontologists need to step up to the mark here and provide proper
>>> recognition
>>> for system components.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Matthew West
>>> Information  Junction
>>> Tel: +44 1489 880185
>>> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
>>> Skype: dr.matthew.west
>>> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
>>> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>>>
>>> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>>> England
>>> and Wales No. 6632177.
>>> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
>>> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>>> Subscribe/Config:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
>>> Community Wiki:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
>> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
>> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
>> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
>> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>> Subscribe/Config:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
>> Community Wiki:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 09:58:27 -0000
From: Chris Partridge <partridgec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] System Components
To: "'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'"
        <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <008301cce191$37069eb0$a513dc10$@BOROGroup.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;        charset="us-ascii"

 Pat,

It seems to me as if you are just playing with names here. If you want to
call it a pump *role*, that is fine. But that what you are describing seems
not to have the qualities that many people expect to be essential to roles.
These (like qua entities) do not have an individual identity and they do not
do things, they are not agents. Whereas, for example, spatio-temporal
entities come bundled with identity. What have I missed?

So the Hamlet example would better be  Jonathon Pryce's 1992 Hamlet. Or even
better if we use Chairman (President, Bishop or Monarch) , the difference
between Chairman and the Chairman of Goldman Sachs.

Also, not clear to me why you cannot kick your roles - as, again, they are
spatio-temporal entities? When Ronnie Reagan was shot, people said they shot
the President of the US, didn't they? They did not say thank goodness they
only shot Mr Reagan - they could not shoot the President as he is a role.

Regards,
Chris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-
> summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
> Sent: 02 February 2012 02:32
> To: Matthew West
> Cc: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] System Components
>
> Very good question, Matthew. Let me try out an idea on you. Your P101 is
> actually a role played by a pump, rather than a pump itself. Think of it
as
> being like Hamlet, as played by Lawrence Olivier (P101 as played by
S3556).
> You can change actors, and Hamlet is still Hamlet - same role - and while
> Olivier is playing the role, he *is* Hamlet, at least in a sense. But this
second
> "is" cannot be identity, since you can kick the actor, but you can't kick
a role.
>
> Both a pump and a pump-role are spatiotemporal entities, but they have
> different identity conditions. The identity of a pump, like any other
physical
> object, is determined by the disposition of pieces of material stuff
(metal,
> plastic, rubber), but the identity of  the role is determined by its
interfaces to
> the rest of the system (being connected to this pipe in this place and
> operated by this controller, etc..)
>
> You can identify a pump-phase (temporal slice) with a pump-role-phase, but
> you must not identify the actual individuals, so its safer to actually
have a
> relation of 'functioning as' of the like to attach a role-playing thing to
its role.
> Or, you can treat the role as a time-dependent property of the physical
thing,
> but you will probably need a CL-style ability to have properties of
properties
> if you go that (elegant) route.
>
> Make sense?
>
> Pat
>
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:48 AM, Matthew West wrote:
>
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > Last Thursday I complained that most ontologies do not give adequate
> > treatment to what I call system components, and if ontology is going
> > to gain traction within the systems world, it needs to get a better
> > understanding of this central idea in systems engineering.
> >
> > I illustrated the issue by telling the (simplified) life story of a
> > system
> > component: the pump, P101, at the bottom of a distillation column.
> > Here is its story.
> >
> > The designer creates a drawing of the distillation column including at
> > the bottom of the column a pump to pump away the column bottoms. He
> > labels it P101, decides that one pump will be sufficient, and gives
> > the specification for the pump in terms of Net Positive Suction Head,
> > differential head, flow rate, materials of construction, and many other
> things.
> >
> > The construction engineer picks up the drawing and specification and
> > notices he has to install a pump as P101. Fortunately, he has a pump
> > in stock from a previous project, that has been in stores unused for 5
> > years which exactly meets the specification. On it is stamped Serial No
> S3556.
> >
> > The designer and the Operator comes to see the pump be installed, and
> > once the connections are made, he gives the pump a friendly kick and
> > says to the construction engineer "It's good to see P101 realized at
> > last". The construction engineer says in return "Yes, and it's good to
> > get S3556 off my hands at last." He turns to the operator and says
> > "Why don't we change your drawings to show S3556 instead of P101?" The
> > operator says "No, don't do that, it's a replaceable part, and one day
> > another pump will be put there, and I don't want to have to change all
> > the drawings and other documentation that refers to P101 each time it
> > is replaced, as far as I am concerned it's the same pump whatever is
> installed there."
> >
> > Some time later the pump breaks down and needs to be taken back to the
> > workshop. The maintenance engineer says to the operator "Hi, can I
> > take
> > S3556 installed as P101 back to the workshop?" The operator replies
> > "Sure, but what am I supposed to do without my P101? If it does not
> > exist I cannot operate my distillation column." The maintenance
> > engineer responds, "I understand. We have another pump S4567, that
> > meets the same specification as P101. We'll replace S3556 with it and
> > you will only be without P101 for a few hours. I don't understand how
> > you can continue to call it P101 though when all the parts have
> > changed at once." The operator replies "I don't care about that. What
> > I care about is what is connected in my system to pump the liquid from
> > the bottom of the column. As long as it does that, it is P101 to me."
> >
> > Later the distillation column is demolished. The operator says, "A sad
> > end, I was very fond of P101, but it is no more." The demolition
> > engineer says, "Yes indeed. Fortunately, we can take S4567 and use it on
> another plant."
> >
> > It's probably worth summarising the key characteristics of a system
> > component:
> > - It comes into existence the first time it is installed.
> > - It is identical to the equipment items installed, whilst they are
> > installed (but not before or after).
> > - It can survive complete replacement of all its parts at once.
> > - It can survive periods of non-existence.
> > - It ceases to exist when the system it is a component of ceases to
exist.
> >
> > This is clearly rather different from the life of ordinary physical
objects.
> > However, relatively few ontologies recognise that such things exist.
> > Many try to fob system components off as being classes, or abstract
> > individuals, though these clearly do not have the required
characteristics.
> >
> > Ontologists need to step up to the mark here and provide proper
> > recognition for system components.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Matthew West
> > Information  Junction
> > Tel: +44 1489 880185
> > Mobile: +44 750 3385279
> > Skype: dr.matthew.west
> > matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
> > http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
> >
> > This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
> > England and Wales No. 6632177.
> > Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
> > Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ________________________________________________________________
> _
> > Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> > Subscribe/Config:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> > Community Wiki:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> > Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> _
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-
> summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
> bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/



------------------------------

 
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/


End of ontology-summit Digest, Vol 34, Issue 24
***********************************************

_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/   
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (01)