SUO: RE: Re: Topic :> Definition Of Extension
Doug,
I often consider environment as distinct from a domain and then I find
distributed domains in pervasive environments. I've noticed that
different groups use the term environment in almost opposite ways in the
context of system definition. Perhaps this just reflects a distinction
between endogenous and exogenous views.
The boundary conditions we place on single terms impact interpretations
of composite phrases - hence Jon's word list. So, if a distributed
environment elicits an emergent property, then it can become distinct.
However, I do not know how to distinguish something locally that is
pervasive - the same everywhere.
The original usage below seems to place extensions in the environment
and I would likely retain most of them in the domain.
Your usage of distributed cognitive organisms evokes notions of
intelligent agents.
Cheers,
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-standard-upper-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf Of
Douglas McDavid
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 2:12 PM
To: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: SUO: Re: Topic :> Definition Of Extension
Jon --
Below you note
"the more key words, or the more salient concepts:
Class, Designation, Distribution, Environment, Object (QV)."
I think it would be more appropriate to call out the lexical
unit "Distributed Environment" rather than the individual
words Distribution and Environment. This is a single concept
that Yang Zhanmin uses in his definitions of both Extension
and Intension. I think it's important to draw our attention
to that here.
I suspect that Yang Zhanmin's usage implies an environment
where there are distributed computing machines, but it might
also be (more?) interesting to think about environments
where there are distributed cognitive organisms.
And, of course, we actually live in an environment where
both conditions apply.
To help you stay within the limit of SUO postings, I have
taken the liberty of creating a corresponding definition
thread
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Topic :> Extension 2. <JA, 06 Dec 2003, 01>
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
In: Topic :> Extension. http://suo.ieee.org/email/thrd7.html#11998
JA = Jon Awbrey
YZ = Yang Zhanmin
Re: Topic :> Extension 1. http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11998.html
Detailed here:
JA: 1. What is extension?
JA: 2. What is an extension?
JA: 3. What is the extension of a term?
JA: 4. What is the extension of a concept?
YZ responded:
YZ: 1. Extension is the class of objects designated by
a specific term or concept.
YZ: 2. An extension is just a class of objects.
YZ: In a distributed environment, there may be
different extensions for just one item or
concept
Dear Yang Zhanmin,
Thanks for the input. Your observation about the
variety of extensions in a distributed environment
is especially apt. I believe that much good will
come from exploring the potential consequences of
this idea. Toward the outset of this exploration,
it would emount to the most prudent course for us
to clarify further the meaning and/or meanings of
the various terms and concepts that are invoked
in your expression of the underlying idea.
Here are the more key words, or the more salient concepts:
Class, Designation, Distribution, Environment, Object (QV).
As you can see, I have personally been able to log but one of this lot,
namely, the concept or term of "Object", in the days since time, well,
Formal Time, began, but I believe that I can personally supply one or
three dim quanta toward the coming dawn of logo-ontic awareness from
the dregs of our Group Mind's collective semio-conscious pre-history.
It may take a bit of e-archeology ...
A Google search on the conjunctive list <Class, Runes, SUO>
yielded 118 hits, among which I find a number of pertinent
entries, needles to say, among a host of impertinent ones.
In view of my currently curtailed quota of e-tiquettes,
I'll need to spend a while organonizing these before
logging them in the current, more formal fashion,
as befits the Zeit, the Geist, and the Mores.
Jon Awbrey
Matters Of Reference:
NB. VQ = Videque = See Also = SA.
VQ. Class. http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/msg03669.html
VQ. Concept. http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/msg03799.html
VQ. Extension & Intension. http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/msg03666.html
VQ. Topic :> Concept. http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11997.html
VQ. Topic :> Object. http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11666.html
VQ. Topic :> Term. http://suo.ieee.org/email/msg11681.html
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
http://www.cs.bsu.edu/homepages/mighty/history.html
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Doug McDavid
Almaden Services Research
IBM Academy of Technology
mcdavid@us.ibm.com
ASR - http://www.almaden.ibm.com/asr/
http://www.almaden.ibm.com/coevolution/
BASIS - http://www.research.ibm.com/basis/