RE: Question about ontology

 

Well... If 'part-of' applies to liquid in a fullbottle, then
wouldn't it be true you'd say that some car is part-of a full-garage?
No, some liquid is IN a bottle, and some car is IN a garage. There's no
need to redefine our most fundamental speech patterns! 

/jmc 

On
09.09.2013 11:52, Paul Oude Luttighuis wrote: 

> Dear Sybri team, 
> 
>
My first question would be the question of existence-dependency, in
other words: which terms are needed to define others? In this case it
seems to me that "empty bottle", "liquid", and "pouring" all preceed
"full bottle". 
> 
> The semantic structure at hand then is: the context
of "pouring" defines "full bottle" in terms of "empty bottle" and
"liquid". 
> 
> In other words: pouring *IS* not a relation between
empty bottle and liquid, it *DEFINES* such relations. 
> 
> Such
contextuality however cannot be expressed by OWL-type ontologies. 
> 
>
If you would however want to stick to the OWL world, then part-of would
work perfectly I guess, but then I would see "pouring" as part-of "full
bottle" as well. There is no upfront semantic reason not to. 
> 
>
Regards, 
> 
> Paul 
> 
> FROM: System Bridge [mailto:sysbri1@gmail.com]

> SENT: maandag 9 september 2013 13:32
> TO: public-owl-dev@w3.org
>
SUBJECT: Question about ontology 
> 
> Hello, 
> 
> we are group of PHD
students and we would like to ask you (ontology experts) for
help/advice. 
> 
> We`re trying to make a simple expert system using
ontology as knowledge base. We have come to few problems and before
making any conclusions, we would like to confront it with you. 
> 
> We
noticed that every explanation and example we found uses object
hierarchy, e.g. OneThing isPartOf OtherThing or OneThing hasPart
OtherThings. We don`t know how to model process which also causes that
resulting object will be assembled from some other objects. For example:

> 
> a) Object Empty bottle 
> 
> b) Object Liquid
> c) Process: Liquid
will be poured into the Empty bottle and thus will create some new
object Bottle filled with liquid - see image attached.
> 
> What we need
is to define a relation "Pouring" that is between liquid and empty
bottle. In fact we don't really need "is part of" relations if there is
a way to express "is part of" implicitly in "Pouring" relation, because
it is obvious that the "Bottle with liquid" was created by "Pouring" the
"Liquid" into the "Empty bottle". Also the direction of "Pouring" is
important for us.
> 
> So, the question is whether you may help us
either by explaining this particular example or providing us with
helpful source of information how to solve it.
> 
> Thanks in advance
>

> Your sincerely
> 
> Sybri team, University of Zilina, Slovakia