ontac-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [ontac-forum] Type vs. Class - last chance to vote.

To: "'ONTAC-WG General Discussion'" <ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Chris Partridge" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 07:51:10 -0000
Message-id: <20060123075102.3D76240C300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Michael,    (01)

Are you stipulating the definition of 'meaning' here?    (02)

I know this is an old argument - but surely it is worth remembering.    (03)

It seems to me that in the case of the things that appear in government
systems, axioms will not capture their 'meanings'. What are the axioms for
person or government department? So two people could use the same axioms,
but NOT share EXACTLY the same meaning for the word.    (04)

Similarly, I suspect that many people will want types/classes with different
axioms to be regarded as the same - e.g. equilateral and equiangular
triangles.    (05)

This is not to argue that comparing axioms is not useful/essential. Merely
that it is not the whole story.    (06)

Regards,
Chris    (07)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontac-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Gruninger
> Sent: 23 January 2006 04:19
> To: cmenzel@xxxxxxxx; ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontac-forum] Type vs. Class - last chance to vote.
> 
> > 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?
> 
> 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.
> 
> Note that anyone who sees a URI is expected to look up the
> definition associated with the URI every time they run into it.
> 
> - michael
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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    (08)



_________________________________________________________________
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    (09)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>