Am 07.03.2012 21:11, schrieb henson graves:
> The specification is an information object may be with
> a paper realization, however a car is something else. For manufacturing a
> lot of what needs to be represented is the relationship between cars and
> their specifications, (01)
Of course; but the consideration of the relationship
between artefacts and specifications of artefacts is
orthogonal to both the dimensions of general-specific
and abstract-specific. Usually specifications and
the artefacts produced by those specifications
are concrete. The 'intension' of a specification,
however, i.e., the 'abstract' entity that it
describes, is certainly (quasi-)abstract (Smith), as
are many meanings, if not all. Considering the
relation (to be enforced) between the quasi-abstract
entity of the car-as-it-should-be and the actual
car seems to be the more productive ontological
path to follow than either general-specific,
abstract-concrete, which both pick out other
aspects of what is going on. (02)
John B. (03)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (04)
|