If I create a definition: rabbit_and_toothpick I thereby
define (or at least pick out) a set (here: the empty set) but I do not
define a type. Types are not created by formulation of definitions; they
are discovered in the world (including that part of the world which is
manufactured, e.g. by use of machines, or legislators).
BS
At 09:04 PM 2/6/2006, you wrote:
Barry,
While I hesitate to disagree with you in this domain, that doesn't seem
to
hold up.
You may define a set by rule; the set of all furry animals.
Or, by enumerating membership; {green, blue, rock}
You may define a type by rule; containers of food
Or by enumerating membership DaysOfWeek = {Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday...
}
You may perform set operations on the extent of types and may mix sets
and
types in the same set operations - and doing so may define a set or a
type.
Simply by being a member of a set, instances can now satisfy a new
predicate
(memberOf set). Many feel that a type is defined by such
predicates.
While I am not suggesting they are the same thing, this would suggest
that
the relation between sets and types to their members/extent is the
same
relation. I still struggle with the difference, other than type
being
intent to define a conceptual grouping rather than an arbitrary
grouping.
-Cory
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontac-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Smith, Barry
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 7:59 PM
> To: ONTAC Taxonomy-Ontology Development Discussion
> Subject: RE: Categorization (was RE: [ontac-dev] Representation
of
> attributes)
>
>
> You can include items on a list. Any items you like. The
> set-membership relation is like the relation between an item on
a
> list and the list.
>
> To stand in the instance relation to a type, in contrast, you need
to
> be of that type and that means that you have to be a certain way:
you
> have to have the right sort of DNA, or be created on the basis of
the
> right sort of plan using the right sort of machine, and so
forth.
>
> BS
>
> At 04:33 AM 2/6/2006, you wrote:
> >Dear Barry,
> >
> >This does not answer my question, which is not about the
difference
> >between a set and a type, but between the difference in nature
of the
> >membership/instance of relationship.
> >
> >So please what is different in the nature of these relationships
(not
> >thing things they bring things into relationship too)?
> >
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Matthew West
> >Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
> >Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
> >Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
> >
> >Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
> >Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
http://www.shell.com
>
>
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
[
mailto:ontac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Smith,
Barry
> > > Sent: 04 February 2006 13:41
> > > To: ONTAC Taxonomy-Ontology Development Discussion
> > > Subject: RE: Categorization (was RE: [ontac-dev]
Representation of
> > > attributes)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >MW: Noone has yet been able to explain the difference
(or
> > > even offer an
> > > >explanation) though more than one has asserted a
difference.
> > > I am simply
> > > >seeking enlightenment.
> > >
> > > Sets are mathematical objects; the set-membership relation
is an
> > > abstract relation, which obtains independently of time and
change.
> > > Sets can be defined arbitrarily, as in the {the moon,
Matthew West,
> > > redness, 27} case. Sets are subject to arbitrary
iterations,
> > > combinations and intersections, ad nauseam, as in the
> > >
> > > {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Matthew West}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
> > >
> > > case. Which sets exist is a matter of mathematics and
of
> > > arbitrary definition.
> > >
> > > Types are entities (something like invariant patterns,
commonalities,
> > > kinds) in reality. Which types exist changes from epoch to
epoch
> > > (Darwin tells us) and even from year to year (as new
varities of
> > > potato chip are invented). Which types exist is a matter
of
> > > observation and scientific exeriment. Types are not
subject to
> > > arbitrary iterations, combinations and intersections.
There is no
> > > type 'rabbit or steering wheel'.
> > >
> > > BS
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
_________________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> >
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
> >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
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> 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
_________________________________________________________________
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
_________________________________________________________________
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 (01)
|