Re: One-To-One Relationships

From: V.J. Kumar <vjkmail_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 05:26:51 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <Xns99FAEE9123555vdghher@194.177.96.26>

Jan Hidders <hidders_at_gmail.com> wrote in news:356a41b2-62b0-4106-942f-5670b998435e_at_p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:

> On 2 dec, 05:37, "V.J. Kumar" <vjkm..._at_gmail.com> wrote:

>> Jan Hidders <hidd..._at_gmail.com> wrote
>> innews:7114bf62-b7a6-4b8b-a515-dafc0f24fe62_at_l16g2000hsf.googlegroups.c
>> om: 
>>
>> > Ah, yes, and as we all know, if two concepts have overlap then they
>> > are actually the same. *sigh* The distinction between entities /
>> > relationships, domain objects / predicates is pretty
>> > well-established in linguistics, philosophy and logic. First-order
>> > logic, you may have heard of it, separates them even strictly.
>>
>> Is that so ?  What is 'entity' and 'domain object' in the first order
>> logic ?

>
> In FOL a domain object is an object in the domain. An element of the
> domain of discourse, if you prefer that terminology.
>

None of the introductory or otherwise math logic books uses this kind terminology ('entity', 'domain objects'). I think it is either sloppiness or an attempt to impart an aura of mathematical respectability to various half-baked ideas computer 'scientists' are so fond of. A prudent reader may want to watch for words like 'ontology', 'knowledge engineering', 'semantic web' and their junior partners like 'domain objects', 'entities', etc.

>> Care to provide a definition and a reference to reputable source of
>> such definition?

>
> Almost any introductory text on FOL will do. You already know what I'm
> talking about and are just picking a fight to show off your knowledge
> of logic. So do your own homework.

"Temper, temper". Have no interest in fighting with anybody, just trying to give a fair warning to poor unsuspecting souls.

>
> -- Jan Hidders
>
Received on Sun Dec 02 2007 - 22:26:51 CST