Re: SUO: Proposal for Starter Content
>
> The full document will be available shortly from your local
> (national) standards body or ISO. However, the formal model is
> available on the web in browsable html form at:
>
> http://www.tc184-sc4.org/wg3ndocs/wg3n1328/lifecycle_integration_schema.html
>
> It is written in EXPRESS, an ISO standard data modelling language
> that is defined in ISO 10303-11.
It's nice to have a look at this, I made me quite curious about it, suo aside.
I haven't browsed much of it.
> I should say that my intent/hope for future development may include
> translation into a Description Logic language (OWL?)
OWL is more like an enhanced markup language, isn't it? The underlying DL is
very poor in terms of expressivity. OTOH, it might suffice for most of the
purpose at hand here. I can't really tell, though it seems that most of the
structure expressed (the stuff in BOLD) are things that you could write in more
or less straightforward way with such DLs.
> or First Order Logic
If you allow, I would strongly encourage you to do this. This would allow you
to come up with a nice and clear axiomatic. In the worst case it will end up as
a good documentation (though, who would use such documentation is maybe a
question). In any case, you will have this basis clean. You could later choose
any DL suiting your needs and end up leaving aside a non negligeable part of
the 'ideal' axiomatic.
Of course, you might want to do both, but to revisitate the point you make
below, the DL stuff could be used to copy the EXPRESS specs in part or whole.
In order to lay out more formally some of the gloss, imho, the FOL way is the
one to go. To finish with, it seems to me that in order to be comparable with
existing starters, FOL is desirable as well.
> language and the addition of further axioms than those that are part
> of the structure of the data model, together with inclusion within
> the IFF framework together with other upper ontologies with different
> foundations.
>
> What I am not sure of is where we have got to with how we propose
> content to be formally considered part of our work here.
Some people have argued that a text file should be produced (this was actually
imposed to cycorp). Is it possible to produce such a file with the gloss for
each term and any axiom following? (Although, in the present state, the latter
part would be mostly inheritance information, so it seems.)
What I am most unclear about is whether we have to vote...
Best,
Pierre
> Matthew West
> Principal Consultant
> Shell Information Technology International Limited
> Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Other Tel: +44 7796 336538
> Email: matthew.west@shell.com
> Internet: http://www.shell.com
>
>
--
Pierre Grenon
IFOMIS Uni Leipzig
Haertelstr. 16-18
04107 Leipzig
http://people.ifomis.uni-leipzig.de/pierre.grenon/
pgrenon@ifomis.uni-leipzig.de
phone: 49(0)351971672
fax: 49(0)3519716179