RE: Status of SUMO?
Hello everybody,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-standard-upper-ontology@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> [mailto:owner-standard-upper-ontology@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On
> Behalf Of Adam Pease
> Sent: 09 June 2004 16:31
> To: Philippe Martin; standard-upper-ontology@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
I just could not resist:
> For example
>
> (agent ?WALKING John) John is the agent of walking
>
Yes, this is OK, as long as we have only one, unique John in our
universe.
> (instance ?WALKING Ambulation) ?WALKING is an instance of
> ambulation.
>
> are fine by the principles I've mentioned.
No, the second example is not fine. What you are saying, when cast into
CGs, is
[WALK: Ambulation].
That would be fine if you gave unique names to each instance of all
actions, e.g. cleaning your teeth this morning was called Tom, walking
to buy the newspaper was called Ambulation, buying the newspaper was
Dick, and reading it was identified as Harry, etc. Obviously, tomorrow
you would have to assign different names to the new instances of these
acts.
Events or acts are rarely given names: The Great March, The Velvet
Revolution and 9/11 are exceptions.
So, if we agree that the general act AMBULATION may take the form of
crawling, walking, running, riding a bike, etc., then AMBULATION > WALK,
i.e. ambulation is a supertype (superclass) of walking.
Best,
Pavel
*********************************************************
Pavel Kocura
Department of Computer Science
Loughborough University
Loughborough
Leicestershire LE11 3TU
England
Tel: +44-(0)1509-222939
Fax: +44-(0)1509-211586
Email: P.Kocura@lboro.ac.uk
*********************************************************
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 6/7/2004