On Mar 3, 2006, at 8:27 AM, West, Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321 wrote: (01)
> The diagram IS an ontology (symbols standing in relation to one
> another that make a number of sentences). (02)
Not without a semantics that tells you precisely and systematically
how to interpret the basic diagrammatic elements and how to interpret
complex diagrams recursively in terms of their simple parts. Without
a semantics for the language of your diagrams, a diagram is
meaningless marks on paper or a computer screen. (03)
> What's more I don't need a computer (or understand FOL) to tell me
> what it means. (04)
Right, you need a *semantics* to do that! (Actually, maybe YOU don't
need a semantics tell you what your very own diagrams mean, but those
of us who don't have privileged access to the inside of your head
do! :-) (05)
Chris Menzel (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit (07)
|