Issue 17527: Correct ambiguities in signifiers and definitions of noun concepts (sbvr-rtf) Source: Rule ML Initiative (Mr. John Hall, john.hall(at)modelsystems.co.uk) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: There are two minor ambiguities in definitions of types of noun concept: 1. ‘unitary concept’ is defined as ‘individual concept or general concept that always has at most one instance’ . This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether ‘that always has at most one instance’ applies to both ‘individual concept’ and ‘general concept’ or only to ‘general concept’. 2. ‘individual concept’ is defined as ‘concept that corresponds to only one object [thing]’ (adopted from ISO 1087-1) This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether ‘only’ means ‘exactly one’ or ‘at most one’. The second note in the entry says “While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance …” suggesting that ‘only’ means ‘at most one’. Also, terms used for types of noun concept do not match their definitions. In SBVR, ‘concept’ includes both ‘noun concept’ and ‘verb concept’, but some terms use ‘concept’ for ‘noun concept’. For example, the definition for ‘general concept’ is for a specialization of ‘noun concept’. Discussion: The terms for types of noun concept became a concern after ‘fact type’ was replaced by ‘verb concept’ in Clause 8. Resolution: Update the definitions of ‘unitary concept’ and ‘individual concept’ to remove the ambiguities. Throughout the specification, replace the terms ‘general concept’, ‘unitary concept’ and ‘individual concept’ with, respectively, ‘general noun concept’, ‘unitary noun concept’ and ‘individual noun concept’ Revised Text: On printed page 21 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE unitary concept Definition: individual concept or general concept that always has at most one instance General Concept: noun concept WITH unitary noun concept Definition: general noun concept that always has at most one instance or individual noun concept On printed page 22 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE individual concept FL Source: ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [‘individual concept’] Definition: concept that corresponds to only one object [thing] General Concept: unitary concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual concept is a verb concept role. WITH individual noun concept FL Source: based on ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [‘individual concept’] Definition: noun concept that corresponds to at most one thing General Concept: unitary noun concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual noun concept is a general noun concept. Necessity: No individual noun concept is a verb concept role. UPDATE NOUN CONCEPT TERMS: REPLACE the signifier “general concept” WITH “general noun concept” … list of replacement locations to be provided REPLACE the signifier “unitary concept” WITH “unitary noun concept” everywhere REPLACE the signifier “individual concept” WITH “individual noun concept” everywhere except for the “Source” subentry reference to ISO 1087-1 in the entry for the concept currently termed “individual concept’ UPDATE DIAGRAMS: REPLACE the following diagrams WITH diagrams that replace the signifiers “general concept”, “unitary concept” and “individual concept” with, respectively, “general noun concept”, “unitary noun concept” and “individual noun concept”: • Figure 8.1 • Figure 9.3 • Figure 11.2 • Diagram in Clause 13.4 on printed page 198 Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: July 20, 2012: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== sposition: Resolved OMG Issue No: 17527 Title: Correct ambiguities in signifiers and definitions of noun concepts Source: RuleML Initiative, John Hall, (john.hall@modelsystems.co.uk) Summary: There are two minor ambiguities in definitions of types of noun concept: 1. .unitary concept. is defined as .individual concept or general concept that always has at most one instance. . This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .that always has at most one instance. applies to both .individual concept. and .general concept. or only to .general concept.. 2. .individual concept. is defined as .concept that corresponds to only one object [thing]. (adopted from ISO 1087-1) This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .only. means .exactly one. or .at most one.. The second note in the entry says .While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance .. suggesting that .only. means .at most one.. Also, terms used for types of noun concept do not match their definitions. In SBVR, .concept. includes both .noun concept. and .verb concept., but some terms use .concept. for .noun concept.. For example, the definition for .general concept. is for a specialization of .noun concept.. Discussion: The terms for types of noun concept became a concern after .fact type. was replaced by .verb concept. in Clause 8. Resolution: Update the definitions of .unitary concept. and .individual concept. to remove the ambiguities. Throughout the specification, replace the terms .general concept., .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .general noun concept., .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept. Revised Text: On printed page 21 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE unitary concept Definition: individual concept or general concept that always has at most one instance General Concept: noun concept WITH unitary noun concept Definition: general noun concept that always has at most one instance or individual noun concept On printed page 22 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE individual concept FL Source: ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: concept that corresponds to only one object [thing] General Concept: unitary concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual concept is a verb concept role. WITH individual noun concept FL Source: based on ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: noun concept that corresponds to at most one thing General Concept: unitary noun concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual noun concept is a general noun concept. Necessity: No individual noun concept is a verb concept role. UPDATE NOUN CONCEPT TERMS: REPLACE the signifier .general concept. WITH .general noun concept. . list of replacement locations to be provided REPLACE the signifier .unitary concept. WITH .unitary noun concept. everywhere REPLACE the signifier .individual concept. WITH .individual noun concept. everywhere except for the .Source. subentry reference to ISO 1087-1 in the entry for the concept currently termed .individual concept. UPDATE DIAGRAMS: REPLACE the following diagrams WITH diagrams that replace the signifiers .general concept., .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .general noun concept., .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept.: . Figure 8.1 . Figure 9.3 . Figure 11.2 . Diagram in Clause 13.4 on printed page 198 Disposition: Resolved Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 18:59:11 +0100 From: John Hall User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 To: SBVR RTF , issues@omg.org Subject: [SBVR RTF] Issue 17527 and Issue 17439 drafts X-Mailcore-Auth: 4600872 X-Mailcore-Domain: 13170 Hello all, Attached are updated drafts of issues 17527 and Issue 17439 after thinking through the discussion on them in last week's teleconference (20 July) Regards, John Content-Type: application/msword; name="SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts ]20120726 1500" BST].doc" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename*0="SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts"; filename*1=" ]20120726 1500 BST].doc" SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts ]20120726 1500.doc Issue 17439 - Individual Verb Concept [20120726 1700 BST].doc Disposition: Resolved OMG Issue No: 17527 Title: Correct ambiguities in signifiers and definitions of noun concepts Source: RuleML Initiative, John Hall, (john.hall@modelsystems.co.uk) Summary: There are two minor ambiguities in definitions of types of noun concept: 1. .unitary concept. is defined as .individual concept or general concept that always has at most one instance. . This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .that always has at most one instance. applies to both .individual concept. and .general concept. or only to .general concept.. 2. .individual concept. is defined as .concept that corresponds to only one object [thing]. (adopted from ISO 1087-1) This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .only. means .exactly one. or .at most one.. The second note in the entry says .While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance .. suggesting that .only. means .at most one.. Also, terms used for types of noun concept do not match their definitions. In SBVR, .concept. includes both .noun concept. and .verb concept., but some terms use .concept. for .noun concept.. For example, the definition for .general concept. is for a specialization of .noun concept.. Discussion: The terms for types of noun concept became a concern after .fact type. was replaced by .verb concept. in Clause 8. After RTF discussion of the impact of replacing the term .general concept. with .general noun concept., it was decided not to include this change. Resolution: Add a synonym .general noun concept. to .general concept.. Update the definitions of .unitary concept. and .individual concept. to remove the ambiguities. Throughout the specification, replace the terms .general concept., .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .general noun concept., .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept. Revised Text: On printed page 19 in Clause 8.1.1, under the entry for .general concept., before the Definition sub-entry ADD Synonym: general noun concept On printed page 21 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE unitary concept Definition: individual noun concept or general concept that always has at most one instance General Concept: noun concept Concept Type: concept type Note: The meaning of a singular definite description is a unitary concept. WITH unitary noun concept Definition: general concept that always has at most one instance or individual noun concept Concept Type: concept type Note: A unitary noun concept has at most one instance at any given time in any given possible world, but the instance can change over time. Note: On printed page 22 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE individual concept Source: ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: concept that corresponds to only one object [thing] General Concept: unitary concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual concept is a verb concept role. Note: Individual concepts are unitary concepts whose extensions are necessarily invariant across all possible worlds. Note: While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance in all possible worlds, there can be multiple individual concepts that correspond to the same thing. Different definite descriptions of the same individual thing can represent different individual concepts that correspond to that thing. If an individual concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world. Note: A full understanding of .individual concept. requires a full understanding of the Necessities in Clause 8.6.2 .Necessities Concerning Extension.. Example: The individual concept .California. whose one instance is an individual state in the United States of America. WITH individual noun concept Source: based on ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: noun concept that corresponds to at most one thing General Concept: unitary noun concept Necessity: No individual noun concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual noun concept is a verb concept role. Note: Individual noun concepts are unitary noun concepts whose extensions are necessarily invariant across all possible worlds. Note: The meaning of a singular definite description is an individual noun concept. Note: While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance in all possible worlds, there can be multiple individual noun concepts that correspond to the same thing. Different definite descriptions of the same individual thing can represent different individual noun concepts that correspond to that thing. If an individual noun concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world. Note: A full understanding of .individual noun concept. requires a full understanding of the Necessities in Clause 8.6.2 .Necessities Concerning Extension.. Example: The individual noun concept .California. whose one instance is an individual state in the United States of America. UPDATE NOUN CONCEPT TERMS: REPLACE the signifier .general concept. WITH .general noun concept. . list of replacement locations to be provided REPLACE the signifier .unitary concept. WITH .unitary noun concept. everywhere REPLACE the signifier .individual concept. WITH .individual noun concept. everywhere - except for the .Source. subentry reference to ISO 1087-1 in the entry for the concept currently termed .individual concept. UPDATE DIAGRAMS: REPLACE the following diagrams WITH diagrams that replace the signifiers .general concept., .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .general noun concept., .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept.: . Figure 8.1 . Figure 9.3 . Figure 11.2 . Diagram in Clause 13.4 on printed page 198 Disposition: Resolved To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: [SBVR RTF] Issue 17527 and Issue 17439 drafts X-KeepSent: A228B808:BF729F5C-85257A48:00149BD2; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.3 September 15, 2011 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 00:41:32 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.3 ZX853HP5|January 12, 2012) at 07/27/2012 00:41:32, Serialize complete at 07/27/2012 00:41:32 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12072704-5930-0000-0000-00000A408B36 John, Regarding 17527: * I think we should add an example for 'unitary noun concept'. I suggest 'Air Force One' defined as "airplane that is carrying the President of the United States". * I disagree with moving this Note from 'unitary noun concept' to 'individual noun concept': "The meaning of a singular definite description is a unitary noun concept". The definite description "the airplane that is carrying the President of the United States" does not describe the same thing across all time but instead a concept that has one instance. * For 'individual noun concept", in the "Source:" caption, "based on" is not a keyword in Annex C and should be dropped. * For 'individual noun concept", you should not drop the "Concept Type" caption. * The Note under 'individual noun concept' that reads "Different definite descriptions of the same individual thing can represent different individual noun concepts that correspond to that thing. If an individual noun concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world." -- applies also to unitary noun concepts. Regarding 17439: * Personally, I think that concept types that derive from both 'verb concept' and 'proposition' create more confusion than they are worth. Intuitively, a verb concept has roles that are "filled in" by propositions. These two new verb concepts are about "pre-filling-in" the roles. So now we have verb concepts where the roles do not have to be filled in because they are already specified. To me this confuses the verbs themselves with the propositions built out of the verbs. * The proposed definition of 'unitary verb concept' is not parallel with the definition of 'unitary noun concept' from 17527. Yet the issue concern is creating parallel structures between 'noun concept' and 'verb concept'. * We already agreed that individual verb concepts are propositions. I think unitary verb concepts are also propositions. * The distinction between 'unitary verb concept' and 'individual verb concept' implies that some uses of verb concepts can correspond to more than one state of affairs at different times in a possible world. The example âThe President flies to the alternate seat of government on Air Force Oneâ shows this. It clearly contradicts the Necessity in 8.5.2 that "Each proposition corresponds to at most one state of affairs". This is EXACTLY the issue that the Date-Time FTF has been complaining about, so I am really pleased to see that you now recognize our concern: a proposition can correspond to multiple states of affairs at different times in a single possible world. * The two examples for 'unitary verb concept' are unclear because they do not distinguish the roles from the verb symbol(s), nor do they give definitions. I think if we had complete examples, we would see how confusing it is to combine 'verb concept' and 'proposition' in one concept type. * It seems to me that unitary and individual verb concepts are always derived from (subtypes of) 'general' verb concepts. Should we say that? * The Necessity for 'individual verb concept' uses a verb symbol "is filled by" that does not exist in SBVR. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, IBM Research From: John Hall To: SBVR RTF , issues@omg.org, Date: 07/26/2012 02:07 PM Subject: [SBVR RTF] Issue 17527 and Issue 17439 drafts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello all, Attached are updated drafts of issues 17527 and Issue 17439 after thinking through the discussion on them in last week's teleconference (20 July) Regards, John [attachment "SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts ]20120726 1500 BST].doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM] [attachment "Issue 17439 - Individual Verb Concept [20120726 1700 BST].doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM] To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: Fw: [SBVR RTF] Issue 17527 and Issue 17439 drafts X-KeepSent: 768B8614:1D12B658-85257A48:0056331A; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.3 September 15, 2011 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:49:10 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.3 ZX853HP5|January 12, 2012) at 07/27/2012 11:49:11, Serialize complete at 07/27/2012 11:49:11 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12072715-5112-0000-0000-00000A75662B On further thought, I think the concepts named "unitary verb concept" and "individual verb concept" are misnamed. They should be called "unitary proposition" and "individual proposition" or some such. Reason: what 17439 calls "role filled by an individual concept" is formally named (clause 9.2.2) " binds to ", where the bindable target may be an individual concept. But a role binding occurs in the context of an atomic formulation. If all the role bindings of an atomic formulation are bound to individual concepts or expressions, then the atomic formulation can be a "standalone" closed logical formulation that means a proposition. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, IBM Research ----- Forwarded by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM on 07/27/2012 11:41 AM ----- From: Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM@IBMUS To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org, Date: 07/27/2012 12:44 AM Subject: Re: [SBVR RTF] Issue 17527 and Issue 17439 drafts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John, Regarding 17527: * I think we should add an example for 'unitary noun concept'. I suggest 'Air Force One' defined as "airplane that is carrying the President of the United States". * I disagree with moving this Note from 'unitary noun concept' to 'individual noun concept': "The meaning of a singular definite description is a unitary noun concept". The definite description "the airplane that is carrying the President of the United States" does not describe the same thing across all time but instead a concept that has one instance. * For 'individual noun concept", in the "Source:" caption, "based on" is not a keyword in Annex C and should be dropped. * For 'individual noun concept", you should not drop the "Concept Type" caption. * The Note under 'individual noun concept' that reads "Different definite descriptions of the same individual thing can represent different individual noun concepts that correspond to that thing. If an individual noun concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world." -- applies also to unitary noun concepts. Regarding 17439: * Personally, I think that concept types that derive from both 'verb concept' and 'proposition' create more confusion than they are worth. Intuitively, a verb concept has roles that are "filled in" by propositions. These two new verb concepts are about "pre-filling-in" the roles. So now we have verb concepts where the roles do not have to be filled in because they are already specified. To me this confuses the verbs themselves with the propositions built out of the verbs. * The proposed definition of 'unitary verb concept' is not parallel with the definition of 'unitary noun concept' from 17527. Yet the issue concern is creating parallel structures between 'noun concept' and 'verb concept'. * We already agreed that individual verb concepts are propositions. I think unitary verb concepts are also propositions. * The distinction between 'unitary verb concept' and 'individual verb concept' implies that some uses of verb concepts can correspond to more than one state of affairs at different times in a possible world. The example âThe President flies to the alternate seat of government on Air Force Oneâ shows this. It clearly contradicts the Necessity in 8.5.2 that "Each proposition corresponds to at most one state of affairs". This is EXACTLY the issue that the Date-Time FTF has been complaining about, so I am really pleased to see that you now recognize our concern: a proposition can correspond to multiple states of affairs at different times in a single possible world. * The two examples for 'unitary verb concept' are unclear because they do not distinguish the roles from the verb symbol(s), nor do they give definitions. I think if we had complete examples, we would see how confusing it is to combine 'verb concept' and 'proposition' in one concept type. * It seems to me that unitary and individual verb concepts are always derived from (subtypes of) 'general' verb concepts. Should we say that? * The Necessity for 'individual verb concept' uses a verb symbol "is filled by" that does not exist in SBVR. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, IBM Research From: John Hall To: SBVR RTF , issues@omg.org, Date: 07/26/2012 02:07 PM Subject: [SBVR RTF] Issue 17527 and Issue 17439 drafts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello all, Attached are updated drafts of issues 17527 and Issue 17439 after thinking through the discussion on them in last week's teleconference (20 July) Regards, John [attachment "SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts ]20120726 1500 BST].doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM] [attachment "Issue 17439 - Individual Verb Concept [20120726 1700 BST].doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM] Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 18:10:26 +0100 From: John Hall User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 To: Donald Chapin , SBVR RTF Subject: [SBVR] Updated drafts of Issues 14849 and 17527 for Jacksonville teleconference X-Mailcore-Auth: 4600872 X-Mailcore-Domain: 13170 Hello all, Attached are updated drafts of Issues 14849, 17527, taking account of feedback from earlier meetings (in case we have time to get to them today). I apologize that I have deleted the change-tracked versions, but can recreate them if necessary. I intended also to send a new draft of 17439 but, on re-reading the feedback, I had some second thoughts. I'll get it done over the next day or two. Regards, John SBVR Issues 14849 Instances of verb concept should be states of affairs (2012-09-13-1500-BST).doc Content-Type: application/msword; name="SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts [20120913 1500" BST].doc" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename*0="SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts"; filename*1=" [20120913 1500 BST].doc" SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts [20120913 1500.doc Disposition: Resolved OMG Issue No: 17527 Title: Correct ambiguities in signifiers and definitions of noun concepts Source: RuleML Initiative, John Hall, (john.hall@modelsystems.co.uk) Summary: There are two minor ambiguities in definitions of types of noun concept: 1. .unitary concept. is defined as .individual concept or general concept that always has at most one instance. . This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .that always has at most one instance. applies to both .individual concept. and .general concept. or only to .general concept.. 2. .individual concept. is defined as .concept that corresponds to only one object [thing]. (adopted from ISO 1087-1) This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .only. means .exactly one. or .at most one.. The second note in the entry says .While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance .. suggesting that .only. means .at most one.. Also, terms used for types of noun concept do not match their definitions. In SBVR, .concept. includes both .noun concept. and .verb concept., but some terms use .concept. for .noun concept.. For example, the definition for .general concept. is for a specialization of .noun concept.. Discussion: The terms for types of noun concept became a concern after .fact type. was replaced by .verb concept. in Clause 8. After RTF discussion of the impact of replacing the term .general concept. with .general noun concept., it was decided not to include this change. Resolution: Add a synonym .general noun concept. to .general concept.. Update the definitions of .unitary concept. and .individual concept. to remove the ambiguities. Throughout the specification, replace the terms .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept. Revised Text: On printed page 19 in Clause 8.1.1, under the entry for .general concept., before the Definition sub-entry ADD Synonym: general noun concept On printed page 21 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE unitary concept Definition: individual noun concept or general concept that always has at most one instance General Concept: noun concept Concept Type: concept type Note: The meaning of a singular definite description is a unitary concept. WITH unitary noun concept Definition: general concept that always has at most one instance or individual noun concept Concept Type: concept type Note: A unitary noun concept has at most one instance at any given time in any given possible world, but the instance can change over time. Note: Different definite descriptions of the same thing can represent different unitary concepts that correspond to that thing. If a unitary noun concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world. Example: The unitary concept .Air Force One.: the airplane that is carrying the President of the United States, which may be a different aircraft at different times. On printed page 22 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE individual concept Source: ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: concept that corresponds to only one object [thing] General Concept: unitary concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual concept is a verb concept role. Note: Individual concepts are unitary noun concepts whose extensions are necessarily invariant across all possible worlds. Note: While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance in all possible worlds, there can be multiple individual concepts that correspond to the same thing. Note: A full understanding of .individual concept. requires a full understanding of the Necessities in Clause 8.6.2 .Necessities Concerning Extension.. Example: The individual concept .California. whose one instance is an individual state in the United States of America. WITH individual noun concept Dictionary Basis: ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: noun concept that corresponds to at most one thing General Concept: unitary noun concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual noun concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual noun concept is a verb concept role. Note: Individual noun concepts are unitary noun concepts whose extensions are necessarily invariant across all possible worlds. Note: The meaning of a singular definite description is an individual noun concept. Note: While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance in all possible worlds, there can be multiple individual noun concepts that correspond to the same thing. Different definite descriptions of the same individual thing can represent different individual noun concepts that correspond to that thing. If an individual noun concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world. Note: A full understanding of .individual noun concept. requires a full understanding of the Necessities in Clause 8.6.2 .Necessities Concerning Extension.. Example: The individual noun concept .California. whose one instance is an individual state in the United States of America. UPDATE NOUN CONCEPT TERMS: REPLACE the signifier .unitary concept. WITH .unitary noun concept. everywhere. REPLACE the signifier .individual concept. WITH .individual noun concept. everywhere - except for the .Source. subentry reference to ISO 1087-1 in the entry for the concept currently termed .individual concept. UPDATE DIAGRAMS: REPLACE the following diagrams WITH diagrams that replace the signifiers .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept.: . Figure 8.1 . Figure 9.3 . Figure 11.2 . Diagram in Clause 13.4 on printed page 198 Disposition: Resolved From: "Donald Chapin" To: Subject: RE: issue 17527 -- SBVR RTF issue Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:10:47 +0100 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac2bzy1sJr20cCyORhuxD7aPIH/Zcg== X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0303.5062D4A7.002E, actions=tag X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=7/50, refid=2.7.2:2012.9.26.93915:17:7.944, ip=81.149.51.65, rules=__HAS_FROM, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NO_NAME, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY, __CTYPE_MULTIPART, __CTYPE_MULTIPART_MIXED, __HAS_X_MAILER, __OUTLOOK_MUA_1, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC, DOC_ATTACHED, __ANY_URI, __URI_NO_WWW, __URI_NO_PATH, __HTML_MSWORD, __HTML_FONT_BLUE, __HAS_HTML, BODY_SIZE_10000_PLUS, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODYTEXTH_SIZE_10000_LESS, __MIME_HTML, __TAG_EXISTS_HTML, __STYLE_RATWARE_2, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, HTML_70_90, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, __OUTLOOK_MUA, RDNS_SUSP, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2beaomr07.btconnect.com X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B020B.5062D4A8.011F,ss=1,re=0.000,vtr=str,vl=0,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=multiengine X-Junkmail-IWF: false All . Attached is the revised resolution for SBVR Issue 17527 incorporating the fixes agreed in last Friday.s telecon, ready for ballot except for the updated figures. Donald From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: 20 July 2012 16:25 To: issues@omg.org; sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: issue 17527 -- SBVR RTF issue Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:00:09 +0100 From: John Hall User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 To: Juergen Boldt , issues@omg.org, SBVR RTF Subject: [SBVR] Issue: Ambiguities in definitions of types of noun concept X-Mailcore-Auth: 4600872 X-Mailcore-Domain: 13170 Hi Juergen, Could you, please, assign an issue number and log the attached. Cheers, John SBVR issue 17527 Ambiguities in definitions of noun concepts [2012-09-26].doc Disposition: Resolved OMG Issue No: 17527 Title: Correct ambiguities in signifiers and definitions of noun concepts Source: RuleML Initiative, John Hall, (john.hall@modelsystems.co.uk) Summary: There are two minor ambiguities in definitions of types of noun concept: 1. .unitary concept. is defined as .individual concept or general concept that always has at most one instance. . This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .that always has at most one instance. applies to both .individual concept. and .general concept. or only to .general concept.. 2. .individual concept. is defined as .concept that corresponds to only one object [thing]. (adopted from ISO 1087-1) This is ambiguous because it is not clear whether .only. means .exactly one. or .at most one.. The second note in the entry says .While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance .. suggesting that .only. means .at most one.. Also, terms used for types of noun concept do not match their definitions. In SBVR, .concept. includes both .noun concept. and .verb concept., but some terms use .concept. for .noun concept.. For example, the definition for .general concept. is for a specialization of .noun concept.. Discussion: The terms for types of noun concept became a concern after .fact type. was replaced by .verb concept. in Clause 8. After RTF discussion of the impact of replacing the term .general concept. with .general noun concept., it was decided not to include this change. Resolution: Add a synonym .general noun concept. to .general concept.. Update the definitions of .unitary concept. and .individual concept. to remove the ambiguities. Throughout the specification, replace the terms .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept. Revised Text: On printed page 19 in Clause 8.1.1, under the entry for .general concept., before the Definition sub-entry ADD Synonym: general noun concept On printed page 21 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE unitary concept Definition: individual noun concept or general concept that always has at most one instance General Concept: noun concept Concept Type: concept type Note: The meaning of a singular definite description is a unitary concept. WITH unitary noun concept Definition: individual noun concept or general concept that always has corresponds to at most one instance thing or individual noun concept General Concept: situational role Concept Type: concept type Note: A unitary noun concept has at most one instance at any given time in any given possible world, but the instance can change over time. Note: Different definite descriptions of the same thing can represent different unitary concepts that correspond to that thing. If a unitary noun concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world. Example: The unitary concept .Air Force One.: the airplane that is carrying the President of the United States, which may be a different aircraft at different times. On printed page 22 in Clause 8.1.1 REPLACE individual concept Source: ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: concept that corresponds to only one object [thing] General Concept: unitary concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual concept is a verb concept role. Note: Individual concepts are unitary noun concepts whose extensions are necessarily invariant across all possible worlds. Note: While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance in all possible worlds, there can be multiple individual concepts that correspond to the same thing. Note: A full understanding of .individual concept. requires a full understanding of the Necessities in Clause 8.6.2 .Necessities Concerning Extension.. Example: The individual concept .California. whose one instance is an individual state in the United States of America. WITH individual noun concept Dictionary Basis: ISO 1087-1 (English) (3.2.2) [.individual concept.] Definition: noun concept that corresponds to at most one thing in all possible worlds General Concept: unitary noun concept Concept Type: concept type Necessity: No individual noun concept is a general concept. Necessity: No individual noun concept is a verb concept role. Note: Individual noun concepts are unitary noun concepts whose extensions are necessarily invariant across all possible worlds. Note: The meaning of a singular definite description is an individual noun concept. Note: While each referring individual concept has at most one and the same instance in all possible worlds, there can be multiple individual noun concepts that correspond to the same thing. Different definite descriptions of the same individual thing can represent different individual noun concepts that correspond to that thing. If an individual noun concept does not correspond to any thing in some world, it does not correspond to any thing in any possible world. Note: A full understanding of .individual noun concept. requires a full understanding of the Necessities in Clause 8.6.2 .Necessities Concerning Extension.. Example: The individual noun concept .California. whose one instance is an individual state in the United States of America. UPDATE NOUN CONCEPT TERMS: REPLACE the signifier .unitary concept. WITH .unitary noun concept. everywhere. REPLACE the signifier .individual concept. WITH .individual noun concept. everywhere - except for the .Source. subentry reference to ISO 1087-1 in the entry for the concept currently termed .individual concept. UPDATE DIAGRAMS: REPLACE the following diagrams WITH diagrams that replace the signifiers .unitary concept. and .individual concept. with, respectively, .unitary noun concept. and .individual noun concept.: . Figure 8.1 . Figure 9.3 . Figure 11.2 . Diagram in Clause 13.4 on printed page 198 Disposition: Resolved X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.7.7855,1.0.431,0.0.0000 definitions=2012-09-26_04:2012-09-26,2012-09-26,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1203120001 definitions=main-1209260174 Subject: Re: issue 17527 -- SBVR RTF issue From: keri Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 09:18:10 -0700 Cc: sbvr-rtf@omg.org To: Donald Chapin , John Hall X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) On Sep 26, 2012, at 3:10 AM, Donald Chapin wrote: > All ­ > > Attached is the revised resolution for SBVR Issue 17527 incorporating the fixes agreed in last Friday.s telecon, ready for ballot except for the updated figures. > > Donald Here is the updated 11.2 Figure (as an .eps file). ~ Keri On Sep 26, 2012, at 3:10 AM, Donald Chapin wrote: All . Attached is the revised resolution for SBVR Issue 17527 incorporating the fixes agreed in last Friday.s telecon, ready for ballot except for the updated figures. Donald Here is the updated 11.2 Figure (as an .eps file). ~ Keri Fig11.2 C&C(Issue 17527).eps