[Attempto] Mereology (was Re: inverse names of relations)

[Simon Spero]

Without getting in to too much  ontological detail, it should be noted that
Smith's approach to ontology is not universally accepted (especially on
universals :-).

See the article by Merrill, the response by Smith and Ceuster, and the
rebuttal by Merill in the journal of Applied Ontology last year - I think
all three articles are still open access:

http://iospress.metapress.com/content/j3324564p5l33863/?p=94dfb401906b427a8b3e9f91406128f6&pi=0

http://iospress.metapress.com/content/1551884412214u67/?p=5087b84fdd9647348fbbaaaa5c6b6be3&pi=0

http://iospress.metapress.com/content/21l17015v46687v0/?p=f181b3ce180b482fab3299b204343ab6&pi=1

For a different approach, see e.g. Cyc's use of the concept of substances
(which find parallels in  [count-] nouns).

Tutorial slides:

http://www.cyc.com/doc/tut/ppoint/SpatialPropertiesAndRelations_files/v3_document.htm

Parts:

http://www.cyc.com/cycdoc/vocab/part-vocab.html

Substances:

http://www.cyc.com/cycdoc/vocab/composition-vocab.html

Spatial relationships:

http://www.cyc.com/cycdoc/vocab/spatial-vocab.html

Cnl relevance: cyc can help with disambiguation -
http://en.scientificcommons.org/42859738

ACE wins from micro-theory like ontologies too:
http://valoda.ailab.lv/cnl/cnl2009.pdf

Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ifi.uzh.ch/pipermail/attempto/attachments/20110911/16e48b84/attachment.html>