Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: SUO: a silly question about the new modular architecture




Seth,
   I'd say that although you could do this, then you wouldn't be using the 
standard.  A good analogy would be to another standard like XML.  You could 
decide to define a new special character in the language if you want, but 
then tools that depend upon a particular syntax wouldn't work.  You'd have 
to write new tools, thus limiting the value of the standard for your work.
   I believe this would hold true to nearly the same extent even if we were 
to adopt a theory lattice approach.  Let's say that you worked in a 
manufacturing consortium that agree to use the "SUO 4d Temporal Ontology" 
"Structural Ontology" and "Mereology1" modules from a modular SUO 
standard.  If you decided to change one of the axioms in the mereology 
module then your product might not work with others that agreed to use the 
standard.
   I don't believe that there are any existing tools that would perform 
this sort of theory compilation nor has anyone volunteered to build them 
but that's another story.

Adam

At 10:34 AM 8/29/2001 -0700, Seth Russell wrote:

>I must admit to being new at this ... but can I ask a silly question anyway
>...
>
>Let's say I don't like the way physical entities are defined in the ~new
>proposed~ modular architecture and want to substitute my own definition, but
>still want to use the rest of SUMO.  How do I do it?
>
>For instance suppose I want to define a physical entity as something that
>has *any* physical relation to some other entity.   Like:
>[1]     (connectedVia Knee Thigh Leg)
>[2]     (instance connectedVia physicalRelation)
>... so based on this, there would be an axiom from which we could infer that
>Knee, Thigh and Leg were physical entities.
>
>Do I just substitute all the axioms on the node
>http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/SKB.jsp?req=SC&skb=Merge-WordNet
>&id=95
>with my own, and then thread through all the other axioms that are in
>libraries that I have chosen and replace the axioms that refer to the
>constants defined on that node ?  Will SUO provide me with tools to help in
>this process?
>
>Seth Russell

Adam Pease
Teknowledge
(650) 424-0500 x571