Re: SUO: a silly question about the new modular architecture
John and Adam,
The modular approach would minimize the amount of overlap, so there
would actually be very little recoding that would need to be done.
For example, all the axioms about geometry, space, time, etc.,
could be used unchanged. Axioms for mathematical structures,
physics, engineering, etc., would be unchanged if they used the
4D coordinate system.
AP > I'm inclined to think that
> there will be a big ripple effect which will mean we'll have two
> ontologies.
That is just one more reason why it is important to have a modular
approach. It enables you to determine exactly where the dependencies
are for any particular subtheory.
AP> The more divisions we have, the less of a standard we
> have.
That all depends on how you organize your theor(y/ies). With the
lattice, there is a place for everything, and the dependencies
are shown by the partial ordering (which shows the explicit
inheritance paths from one theory to another). The separate
modules have the effect of firewalls that isolate or restrain
the ripple effects to just those subtheories that inherit from
the one that was changed.
JT>Is the theory that one could pick either the 3d or 4d spatio-temporal
>module and then use the rest of the ontology modules as is (they will work
>equally well with either the 3d or 4d module), or would all the other
>modules in the system have to be encoded twice -- one version to work with
>the 3d module, and another version to work with the 4d module?
With a single monolithic ontology, a change to one axiom creates
a totally new ontology, which requires everything to be tested
to ensure consistency. You can't do unit testing on individual
modules when the entire ontology is a single monolith.
If the modules are organized in a partial ordering (similar to
the modules of an object-oriented programming language), then
the only modules that are affected by a change to theory X are
the ones that inherit from X.
Bottom line: The lattice of theories supports multiple inheritance
in the same way as O-O inheritance. With the monolithic approach,
every change creates a new monolith.
John Sowa