On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 07:33:39PM +0100, Barry Smith wrote:
> At 04:34 PM 1/20/2006, you wrote:
> >I thought it was time I tried to offend you both ;), with my usual
> >definition of ontology:
> >
> >An ontology defines the terms used to describe and represent an area of
> >knowledge (subject matter). An ontology also is the model (set of
> >concepts) for the meaning of those terms. An ontology thus defines the
> >vocabulary and the meaning of that vocabulary.
>
> It seems that this means ontology a branch of epistemology (= the
> theory of knowledge)
>
> Better, would be, I think:
>
> An ontology defines (01)
Well, it axiomatizes them, and occasionally defines them in terms of the
axiomatized primitives, but maybe that's too much a logician's point. (02)
> the terms used to describe and represent THE TYPES OF ENTITIES IN an
> area of knowledge (subject matter) (03)
The types (classes, whatever); ok, I'm down with that. (Though I really
don't like "ENTITY", but hey we've got axioms to clear up what we mean! ;-) (04)
> AND THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THESE ENTITIES. (05)
What happened to the entities themselves? Granted, we typically
axiomatize types, but suppose I'm developing, say, a demographic
ontology. Don't I get to talk about Philadelphia as well as the type
CITY? Don't we want axioms like "(InstanceOf Philly CITY)"? (06)
> An ontology thus defines the vocabulary and the DOMAIN OF ENTITIES AND
> RELATIONS TO WHICH that vocabulary REFERS. (07)
Oh, good, there are the entities. But what happened to the types?
Shouldn't it be: the domain of ENTITYs, TYPEs, and RELATIONs? (08)
-chris (09)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (010)
|