> JS>> The word 'class' would hopelessly confuse the issue.
>
> CM> Properly axiomatized, it simply wouldn't.
>
> JS> Are you claiming that anybody who hears or sees the word
> 'class' is expected to look up the axioms associated with
> the word every time they run into it? (01)
As a matter fact, yes.
This is the whole rationale for specifying an ontology --
preventing the lack of interoperability that arises when
people use the same word yet ascribe different meanings to it.
If two people use the same axioms, they share the same meaning for the word;
if they use different axioms, they have ascribe different meanings to the word. (02)
Note that anyone who sees a URI is expected to look up the
definition associated with the URI every time they run into it. (03)
- michael (04)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (05)
|