At 07:49 PM 1/23/2006, you wrote:
>I see what you are saying, however what if a process has different
>portions - do those portions (which I assume are perdurants, to use
>the phrase from BFO) need to have an identified time index? Here is
>my example -
>
> Frank is in the contagious phase of his illness.
>
> The illness is a process, the contagious phase is a subprocess
> (which is certainly true of the illness process, but not true of
> the entire life of the illness process).
>
> Is it not more accurate to say "Frank is in the contagious phase
> of the illness, for the first two weeks"? (01)
the 'is' is odd here
it sounds better with 'was' -- when we are looking back, as it were,
on the unfolding history of the illness (02)
also you are here describing not the process but Frank -- it is
necessary to time-index statements of the form: (03)
continuant participant_in process (04)
See: http://genomebiology.com/2005/6/5/R46 (05)
BS (06)
>Chuck
>
>
>
>-----ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----
>
> >To: ONTAC Taxonomy-Ontology Development Discussion
> ><ontac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >From: "Smith, Barry" <phismith@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent by: ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Date: 01/23/2006 11:11AM
> >Subject: RE: [ontac-dev] Type vs. Class -- Please vote
> >
> >We need to time-index the part-of relation for continuants (e.g.
> >objects), because the latter can have different parts at different
> >times. 'This molecule is part of Michael West's nose' is not
> >determinately true or false; it becomes determinately true or false
> >when we add a time-index to the whole assertion.
> >
> >There is nothing analogous in the realm of properties: 'This missile
> >movement is part of the Second World War' is determinately true, or
> >false, independently of when it is asserted.
> >
> >BS
> >
> >At 05:03 PM 1/23/2006, you wrote:
> >
> >>Some comments below concerning the discussion about parts of
> >objects,
> >>processes, etc.
> >>
> >>Original comments below by Barry Smith:
> >>-----ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----
> >> >The details are supplied in full in:
> >> >
> >> > http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/articles/SNAP_SPAN.pdf
> >> >
> >> >Basically, all instance-level x part_of y
> >> >assertions for 3D objects are indexed by times.
> >> >This is not necessary for 4D objects, since
> >> >processes do not gain and lose parts over time.
> >>
> >>My comment here, is concerning processes. I can envision a 4D
> >object
> >>(process) having component parts (sub-processes?). In that case,
> >should we
> >>not also concerning indexing x part_of y (where y is a process) also
> >by
> >>time? The alternative seems to suggest that all processes (and
> >>sub-processes) are without time boundary.
> >>
> >>Chuck Turnitsa
> >>
> >>
> >>_________________________________________________________________
> >>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/OntologyTaxonomyCoordina
> >tingWG
> >
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >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/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinat
> >ingWG
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>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 (07)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (08)
|