Re: Question about ontology

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 4:09 PM, <jmcclure@hypergrove.com> wrote:
>
> 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

Keet & Artale (2007) [1] published a taxonomy of merelogical and
meronymic relations that might be useful here. While I don't know
whether I'd *use* such a representation as I'm about to describe, I
could see saying that a

a full-bottle-system S has as structural/functional parts
  some bottle B and
  some quantity Q of liquid
and that it's required that Q is in B.

//JT

[1] Representing and Reasoning over a Taxonomy of Part-Whole Relations
http://www.inf.unibz.it/~artale/papers/appl-onto-07.pdf

>
> 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
>
>




-- 
Joshua Taylor, http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~tayloj/

Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 11:14:58 UTC