On Jul 29, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Yves Raimond wrote:
The disjoint statement between agent and factor defines factors as
something that doesn't have an active role in the event.
But are necessary for the event to take place? Or play a
significant role in
the event, so that if they were not present, the event would have
been
different? Or something?
Sorry, missed that comment for some reason. In this ontology, events
are "just" arbitrary classifications of space--time regions. Hence you
can perfectly classify any such region ("I thought about RDF over the
last ten years", "I was walking to the office from 8 to 9 this
morning"). And yes, it is purposely loose.
Fine. I have no quarrel with this kind of looseness, let me quickly
add. But it would have been great if the published documentation had
said this up front, explicitly. I guess the moral is, being
underspecified in this sense is fine, but you need to say that
**explicitly** in the documentation. Lack of documentation does not
make the concept automatically 'loose'. (It might just be poor
documentation of a 'tight' concept. There are many examples out
there...)
Pat
y
------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
