SUO: RE: RE: Re: Re: Abstraction, Analogy, Example, Icon, Metaphor, Model, Morphism, Paradigm, Prototype, Simulation

["West, Matthew MR SSI-GREA-UK" <Matthew.R.West@is.shell.com>]

Dear Phil,

My origins are in engineering (Chemical Engineering to be precise) and the
community I "represent" here is ISO TC184/SC4 Industrial Data, where I am
Deputy Convenor of WG10 - Technical Architecture.

The focus of TC184/SC4 is technical data exchange and integration. This can
be from property data to CAD data to product catalogues.

There is quite a lot that has gone on in the area (I think) you are talking
about. ISO 10303-50 (mathematical representation) and ISO10303-45 (material
properties) come to mind.

Of course the basis is data models, rather than FOL type stuff, but as I am
increasingly realising the gap between the two is narrower than most people
think. It is just that very few try to cross it.

The SC4 On-Line Information Store (SOLIS) is at www.nist.gov/sc4 

Regards  
      Matthew
============================================
Matthew West
Operations & Asset Management
Shell Services International
H3229, Shell Centre, London, SE1 7NA, UK.
Tel: +44 207 934 4490 Fax: 7929 
Mobile: +44 7796 336538
E-mail: Matthew.R.West@is.shell.com
http://www.shellservices.com/
============================================

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Jackson [mailto:phil.jackson@computer.org]
> Sent: 31 October 2000 11:41
> To: Jack Park; Jon Awbrey
> Cc: Stand Up Ontology
> Subject: SUO: RE: Re: Re: Abstraction, Analogy, Example, 
> Icon, Metaphor,
> Model, Morphism, Paradigm, Prototype, Simulation
> 
> 
> 
> Jack and Jon,
> 
> I'm especially interested in ontology and epistemology of 
> physics, and think
> these topics could be relevant to SUO....What I find very 
> interesting is how
> we are able to extend our concept base for scientific 
> knowledge, e.g. via
> metaphoric application of concepts from one domain to 
> another.... Which
> relates to linguistics, semiotics, etc... So I'd like to 
> participate, or at
> least lurk, in a discussion of such topics....
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Phil Jackson
> 
> >
> > Jon,
> > I would be very interested to persue a discussion of 
> qualitative physics.
> > Would that need to be conducted on a different venue?
> > Jack Park
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
> > <snippage>
> > OK, this part I think I get, as I did spend some time studying
> > the "Qualitative Physics" of Ken Forbus, Ben Kuipers, and others.
> > But that was a long time ago, and my present approach to these
> > issues has evolved quite a bit since then.  Let me know if you
> > want to talk about that.
> >
> 
>