- From: Richard H. McCullough <rhm@pioneerca.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 13:34:51 -0700
- To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net>
- Cc: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>, <public-owl-comments@w3.org>
----- Original Message ----- From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@bestweb.net. > > In current terminology, we have three terms 'set', 'class', and 'type'. > The words 'set' and 'type' have long histories in both technical and > informal usage, and there is no confusion about their meanings. > > The word 'class' has been used in so many conflicting ways in both > technical and informal usage that it causes a great deal of confusion. > > Therefore, my recommendation is to prefer the words 'set' and 'type' > for all metalevel usage, both technical and informal. The word > 'class' could still be used for particular languages in which it > is endemic. But to promote precision, the words 'set' and 'type' > should be preferred for all cross-language discussions. > > John Sowa > Don't forget the word 'concept', as used in natural language. The Rand ITOE 1990 book is a good reference for concept-related terminology. Rand terminology is based on Aristotle. My tabula rasa terminology is based on Rand. > Dick McCullough http://mkrmke.org
Received on Sunday, 26 April 2009 20:35:46 UTC