Characters and States and GUIDs and descriptive data

Robert Huber rhuber at WDC-MARE.ORG
Wed Jan 25 14:07:27 CET 2006


Dear Roger,

I could not reall yunderstand what you and Kevin mean by Characters and
States.
>>>From the example you gave, it appears to be  like  classes (character) and
attributes (states) or you want to assign GUIDs to something like Thesaurus
entries? But maybe I completely misunderstood what you meant..

best regards,Robert
  -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
  Von: Taxonomic Databases Working Group GUID Project
[mailto:TDWG-GUID at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU]Im Auftrag von Roger Hyam
  Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. Januar 2006 12:35
  An: TDWG-GUID at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
  Betreff: Characters and States and GUIDs and descriptive data



  Kevin mentioning Characters and States and GUIDs got me thinking and I was
wondering if we could cover something along these lines before the meeting.
Please excuse me if this has been dealt with on the list. I will use a Delta
type illustration to my point. This may not apply to SDD so much - apologies
if it doesn't but I am trying to get at a general point. My comments may be
more general to GUIDs though...

  When we are dealing with GUIDs we are talking in an Open World model as
opposed to a Closed World model. If I search Google (open world) and don't
find something it isn't because it doesn't exist - it may exist but not be
found for a host of reasons. If I search my local SQL DB (closed world) and
I don't find something then I can safely assume it isn't there. (This may be
a naive description of Open vs Close worlds but it illustrates the point).

  Taking this to the Characters/States model. We have a character that looks
like this:

  Flower Colour (GUID_c01)
  - red (GUID_s01)
  - white (GUID_s02)
  - yellow (GUID_s03)

  And I score a taxon as  "Rose has flower colour red". If I have given
GUIDs to the states then I don't need to use the GUID for the character.
"Rose has s01" is fine as the character is implied.

  Can we assume from this statement that my rose does not have white or
yellow flowers? Yes - but only if it is a closed world and we know that the
character never changes (or hasn't changed since the date of the assertion).
If the choice when scoring had been:

  Flower Colour (GUID_c01)
  - red (GUID_s01)
  - white (GUID_s02)
  - yellow (GUID_s03)
  - dark pink (GUID_s99)

  I may have chosen "Rose has s99" of "Rose has s99 and s01" but I simply
didn't have that choice before.

  So the thing that is troubling me is that Character/State uses a closed
world model where not finding something implies that it doesn't have that
attribute. In an open world system one can only draw conclusions from
presence not absence. We could give GUIDs to characters and states but it
doesn't get us very far as it doesn't permit us to re-use or extend them in
a simple way. (sure you could build an inheritance model for characters and
states but this rapidly becomes a complete ontology language of which there
are a few already available!).

  My gut feeling is that in the long term the Character/State model doesn't
transfer well into an open world model. I suspect this problem may occur in
other descriptive areas where the existing model specifies noun-adjective
pairs that I don't have experience of. Perhaps we could explore this a
little. Perhaps my guts need straightening out!

  Your thoughts greatly appreciated.

  Roger


--

-------------------------------------
 Roger Hyam
 Technical Architect
 Taxonomic Databases Working Group
-------------------------------------
 http://www.tdwg.org
 roger at tdwg.org
 +44 1578 722782
-------------------------------------


------=_NextPart_000_003C_01C621B8.AC555390
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type =
content=3Dtext/html;charset=3DISO-8859-1>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY text=3D#000000 bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D304040013-25012006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Dear&nbsp;Roger,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D304040013-25012006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D304040013-25012006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>I=20
could not reall yunderstand what you and Kevin&nbsp;mean by Characters =
and=20
States. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D304040013-25012006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>From=20
the example you gave, it appears to be&nbsp; like&nbsp; classes=20
(character)&nbsp;and attributes (states)&nbsp;or you want to assign =
GUIDs to=20
something like Thesaurus entries? But m</FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
class=3D304040013-25012006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>aybe I completely=20
misunderstood what you meant..</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D304040013-25012006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D304040013-25012006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>best=20
regards,Robert</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----<BR><B>Von:</B> Taxonomic =
Databases=20
  Working Group GUID Project [mailto:TDWG-GUID at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU]<B>Im =
Auftrag=20
  von </B>Roger Hyam<BR><B>Gesendet:</B> Mittwoch, 25. Januar 2006=20
  12:35<BR><B>An:</B> TDWG-GUID at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU<BR><B>Betreff:</B>=20
  Characters and States and GUIDs and descriptive=20
  data<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><BR>Kevin mentioning Characters and States =
and GUIDs=20
  got me thinking and I was wondering if we could cover something along =
these=20
  lines before the meeting. Please excuse me if this has been dealt with =
on the=20
  list. I will use a Delta type illustration to my point. This may not =
apply to=20
  SDD so much - apologies if it doesn't but I am trying to get at a =
general=20
  point. My comments may be more general to GUIDs though...<BR><BR>When =
we are=20
  dealing with GUIDs we are talking in an Open World model as opposed to =
a=20
  Closed World model. If I search Google (open world) and don't find =
something=20
  it isn't because it doesn't exist - it may exist but not be found for =
a host=20
  of reasons. If I search my local SQL DB (closed world) and I don't =
find=20
  something then I can safely assume it isn't there. (This may be a =
naive=20
  description of Open vs Close worlds but it illustrates the=20
  point).<BR><BR>Taking this to the Characters/States model. We have a =
character=20
  that looks like this:<BR><BR>Flower Colour (GUID_c01)<BR>- red =
(GUID_s01)<BR>-=20
  white (GUID_s02)<BR>- yellow (GUID_s03)<BR><BR>And I score a taxon =
as&nbsp;=20
  "Rose <B>has</B> flower colour red". If I have given GUIDs to the =
states then=20
  I don't need to use the GUID for the character. "Rose has s01" is fine =
as the=20
  character is implied.<BR><BR>Can we assume from this statement that my =
rose=20
  does not have white or yellow flowers? Yes - but only if it is a =
closed world=20
  and we know that the character never changes (or hasn't changed since =
the date=20
  of the assertion). If the choice when scoring had been:<BR><BR>Flower =
Colour=20
  (GUID_c01)<BR>- red (GUID_s01)<BR>- white (GUID_s02)<BR>- yellow=20
  (GUID_s03)<BR>- dark pink (GUID_s99)<BR><BR>I may have chosen "Rose =
has s99"=20
  of "Rose has s99 and s01" but I simply didn't have that choice before. =

  <BR><BR>So the thing that is troubling me is that Character/State uses =
a=20
  closed world model where not finding something implies that it doesn't =
have=20
  that attribute. In an open world system one can only draw conclusions =
from=20
  presence not absence. We could give GUIDs to characters and states but =
it=20
  doesn't get us very far as it doesn't permit us to re-use or extend =
them in a=20
  simple way. (sure you could build an inheritance model for characters =
and=20
  states but this rapidly becomes a complete ontology language of which =
there=20
  are a few already available!).<BR><BR>My gut feeling is that in the =
long term=20
  the Character/State model doesn't transfer well into an open world =
model. I=20
  suspect this problem may occur in other descriptive areas where the =
existing=20
  model specifies noun-adjective pairs that I don't have experience of. =
Perhaps=20
  we could explore this a little. Perhaps my guts need straightening=20
  out!<BR><BR>Your thoughts greatly =
appreciated.<BR><BR>Roger<BR><BR><PRE class=3Dmoz-signature =
cols=3D"72">--

-------------------------------------
 Roger Hyam
 Technical Architect
 Taxonomic Databases Working Group
-------------------------------------
 <A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"http://www.tdwg.org">http://www.tdwg.org</A>
 <A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-abbreviated =
href=3D"mailto:roger at tdwg.org">roger at tdwg.org</A>
 +44 1578 722782
-------------------------------------

</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>


More information about the tdwg-tag mailing list