RE: SUO: Re: Formal SUMO Draft
Adam --
Sorry, my response was misleadingly polite. I dispute that your example
_is_ interesting. It declares a subtype, but nothing about why it is a
subtype worth discriminating - that is what characteristics it has that
differ from other possible subtypes. My point is that if all the terms for
such discrimination have to come from the upper ontology, anything that
truly elaborates on the upper ontology in any way beyond declaring an
undistinguished subtype will be "non-conforming" by the proposed rules.
Doug
Adam Pease <apease@ks.teknowledge.com> on 02/05/2002 04:19:56 PM
To: Douglas McDavid/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS
cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: RE: SUO: Re: Formal SUMO Draft
Doug,
The point here is not the particular example. You made a claim that
"the conformance as stipulated militates against interesting and useful
elaboration." I provided an example of a conforming elaboration. One
could certainly provide additional conforming elaboration for social
giving, giving something as part of an exchange in kind, giving for
political favors, giving money in exchange for a tangible good etc, but
that's not the point.
Adam
At 04:12 PM 2/5/2002 -0800, Douglas McDavid wrote:
>Adam --
>
>How does this differentiate charitable giving from, say, social giving
>(e.g. a birthday present)?
>
>
>Doug
>
>
>Adam Pease <apease@ks.teknowledge.com> on 02/05/2002 12:56:47 PM
>
>To: Douglas McDavid/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS
>cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
>Subject: RE: SUO: Re: Formal SUMO Draft
>
>
>
>Doug,
> Let's make an example of an interesting elaboration then.
>
>(=>
> (and
> (instance ?GIVE CharitableGiving)
> (agent ?GIVE ?AGENT)
> (recipient ?GIVE ?REC)
> (patient ?GIVE ?OBJ))
> (and
> (wants ?REC ?OBJ)
> (inScopeOfInterest ?AGENT ?REC)))
>
>(disjoint CharitableGiving Transaction)
>
>Here are two axioms that create a new class of CharitableGiving, and
define
>it in terms of other SUMO terms. It is an interesting elaboration and it
>is a conforming one according to my proposed conformance statement.
>
>Adam
Adam Pease
Teknowledge
(650) 424-0500 x571