I think Matthew, MichaelG and CHrisM are all right.
You need axioms when you get into the details.
You also want a high level diagram the conveys the main points, w/o gory
details. (01)
M. (02)
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Menzel [mailto:cmenzel@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 1:18 PM
To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
Subject: Re: [uos-convene] Suggestions for structuring the Tu Mar 14
meeting (03)
On Mar 3, 2006, at 8:27 AM, West, Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321 wrote: (04)
> The diagram IS an ontology (symbols standing in relation to one
> another that make a number of sentences). (05)
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. (06)
> What's more I don't need a computer (or understand FOL) to tell me
> what it means. (07)
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! :-) (08)
Chris Menzel (09)
_________________________________________________________________
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
_________________________________________________________________
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 (010)
|