Makes sense, so are we still divided between type and class? Instance
works either way, so do we want to use class or type? (01)
Regards,
Antoinette (02)
Antoinette Arsic
Sr. Information Systems Engineer
The MITRE Corporation
703-337-9016 (VOIP)
*703-983-5286 (new office number, was 883)
*443-567-2703 (new cell) (03)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:59 PM
To: ONTAC Taxonomy-Ontology Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [ontac-dev] Type vs. Class et al. (04)
No one is suggesting that: (05)
> ... rather than saying a dog is a subtype of animal. (06)
The correct syntax is: (07)
"A dog is an instance of the type Dog." (08)
"The type Dog is a subtype of the type Animal." (09)
More simply, you can just drop the word "type" in
most discussions: (010)
"A dog is an instance of Dog." (011)
"Dog is a subtype of Animal." (012)
The advantage of using these last two sentence forms
is that they are independent of any choice of words
for Dog or Animal. (013)
John Sowa (014)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-dev/
To Post: mailto:ontac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-dev/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatin
gWG (015)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-dev/
To Post: mailto:ontac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-dev/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (016)
|