[topicmapmail] Superclass-subclass indentation in the Omnigat
or
Dichev, Christo
dichevc@wssu.edu
Thu, 9 Jan 2003 13:55:23 -0500
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B810.AA7C5E20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
RE: instance-of, class-subclass discussion again:
Composite objects are characterized by the structure of their
components, that is, by the components and how those components
are related. Normally we use "part-of" (a transitive and reflexive)
relation to say that one component is part of another. My question
is how "part-of" relation can be expressed in terms of TM i.e.
"Reinforcement learning" is part of "Machine learning"? I think
that this type of "structural relations" can not be expressed in
terms of "class-subclass" or "class-instance" relations. Part-of
plays important role in ontology - "class-subclass" deals with
categorization, while part-of deals with the object-components topology.
Christo
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B810.AA7C5E20
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: [topicmapmail] Superclass-subclass indentation in the Omnigator</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>RE: instance-of, class-subclass discussion again:</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Composite objects are characterized by the structure of their </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>components, that is, by the components and how those components </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>are related. Normally we use "part-of" (a transitive and reflexive) </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>relation to say that one component is part of another. My question </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>is how "part-of" relation can be expressed in terms of TM i.e. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>"Reinforcement learning" is part of "Machine learning"? I think </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>that this type of "structural relations" can not be expressed in </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>terms of "class-subclass" or "class-instance" relations. Part-of </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>plays important role in ontology - "class-subclass" deals with </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>categorization, while part-of deals with the object-components topology.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Christo</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B810.AA7C5E20--