On Oct 18, 2011, at 10:06 PM, Ali SH wrote:
> Dear Leo and Chris,
>
> Thanks for the responses. I understand the distinction between an inference
>rule and an axiom, (01)
Right, as I'd suspected (and so noted at the bottom of my post). (02)
> the issue for me stems from a terminological confusion, because obviously, an
>axiom can express a rule (not in the same sense as an inference rule; i.e. if
>X is an employee then Y assigns X an employee number). (03)
Looks like an axiom to me. :-) "Rule" just seems to have a pragmatic
connotation that what is expressed is something that *ought* to be done by
whoever is playing a certain role (Y, presumably, in this case). (04)
> That said, your interpretation of rule poses an interesting question, do
>people distinguish an ontology from an ontology + whatever inference rules
>used to interpret it? (05)
Inference rules simply come packaged with whatever logic one is building one's
ontology on (or affixing one's ontology axioms to). (06)
> Based on analogy then, does gmail as software refer to the gmail the source
>code, or gmail the compiled, deployed code? (07)
Sorry, man, that's too heavy for me! :-) (08)
> When people refer to an ontology (or an ontology artifact), are they
>referring singularly to (a) the axioms, or (b) the axioms under deductive
>closure, or (c) the axioms in combination(s) with reasoner(s)? (09)
It seems to me that (a) and (b) are two viable meanings for "ontology". (c)
does not seem feasible to me, except insofar as one identifies a reasoner with
the logic it is based on. (010)
-chris (011)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository (012)
|